Mediation & other forms of ADR — practical guidance for resolving disputes outside of court
We discuss what mediation and other forms of ADR are, their benefits, when they’re most effective and how courts view parties who refuse to engage in them.
Contractual interpretation of liability cap clauses explored by Court of Appeal in ‘victory for common sense’
AuthorsGlyn Lancefield
4 min read
A recent Court of Appeal judgment has major implications for litigants dealing with breach of contract claims as well as anyone drafting liability clauses in contracts.
Contracts often contain limitations whereby liability is ‘capped’ at a maximum sum that’s payable in the event of a breach. In the case of Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited [2024] EWCA Civ 1330, the Court considered issues of the contractual interpretation of such clauses.
Here, Glyn Lancefield explains why the case is a victory for ‘common sense’.
Rolls Royce terminates service agreement
Rolls Royce had entered into a services agreement with Topalsson for digital visualisation software. The contact included a €5m liability cap and provided that “the total liability of either Party to the other under this Agreement shall be limited in aggregate for all claims no matter how arising to the amount of €5m (five million euros)”.
Rolls Royce purported to terminate the contract. Topalsson accepted termination but argued that Rolls Royce was in repudiatory breach of contract and issued Court proceedings in the Technology & Construction Court.
Rolls Royce brought a counterclaim for its own losses.
The decision at first instance
Mrs. Justice O’Farrell decided that the termination was valid. In a Judgment that the Court of Appeal later commented was “crisp and neat”, the Judge awarded €7,962,323 to Rolls Royce and reduced that by the amount due to Topalsson at termination of €794,759 — leaving a balance due to Rolls Royce of €7,167,564.
The Judge then applied the cap to that amount and awarded damages to Rolls Royce of €5m.
Topalsson obtained permission to appeal and argued that the cap on liability should be applied to each side’s claim separately before the set-off exercise is carried out. This would have fixed Topalsson’s liability at €5m, while Rolls Royce’s liability would be €794,759 — and deducting that from the €5m would have produced an overall net sum due to Rolls Royce of €4,205,241.
A victory for common sense
The Court of Appeal agreed with Topalsson in this part of the appeal. Lord Justice Coulson stated that if the parties had intended for the cap to apply after the net financial position had been calculated, “it would have been very easy for the clause to say that”.
The Court of Appeal decided that applying the cap to the sums due to either party accorded with “commercial common sense”.
Is interest subject to the liability cap?
The Court went on to consider a second contractual interpretation issue — whether or not interest is subject to the liability cap.
This was a new point taken by Topalsson in the appeal proceedings and the Court of Appeal Judgment gives a helpful reminder of how that Court will deal with late applications to amend.
Here, the Court of Appeal exercised its discretion to refuse permission to amend. The Judgment referred to Topalsson as having breached numerous Court orders and not being “a party who should be granted any further indulgence by this court”. The Court of Appeal Judgment is a stark reminder of the need to comply with Court Orders and of the risks of not doing so.
Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal went on to consider the merit of the issue regarding interest — deciding that it fell outside of the liability cap. There were separate interest clauses in the contract which stated that the interest payable under them was a substantial remedy.
Talk to us
If you need help with issues around contractual interpretation, quantifying damages in breach of contract claims or drafting contract terms, talk to us by giving us a call on 0333 004 4488, sending us an email at hello@brabners.com or completing our contact form below.
Talk to us
Loading form...
Related insights
How retailers can protect their business from false or misleading claims — key legal & practical considerations
We outline the steps that retailers can take to contain an emerging online issue and the legal remedies available for responding to false statements.
International arbitration — the scope of supervisory jurisdiction & anti-suit injunctions following Star Hydro
We outline the Court of Appeal’s decision, consider how the Supreme Court is likely to approach the appeal and highlight five key takeaways.
How the CJC’s litigation funding reforms aim to restore certainty after PACCAR
We examine the CJC’s recommendations and their implications for funders, claimants and practitioners navigating this evolving area.
3 potential ways generative AI could lead to defamation claims
We explain where generative AI has the potential to damage individuals’ reputations and examine relevant case law from other jurisdictions.
Brabners secures favourable policy construction judgment for Acasta
Our award-winning litigation team has secured a High Court judgment in favour of Acasta European Insurance Company Limited.
London expansion & record revenues drive next phase of growth at Brabners
We’re delighted to announce the opening of a new office in London, marking a major milestone at the end of a year defined by strong financial performance.
PR under fire — what happens when clients sue?
We explore the types of claims that PR firms can face when an initial complaint escalates and outline some practical steps to manage the risks.
Navigating partnership conflict in law firms — 10 top tips to prevent disputes
We share ten top tips for preventing partnership disputes and guidance on recognising the warning signs and responding effectively if conflict does arise.
HyNot judicial review decision highlights the importance of acting promptly
We explore how the Court considered the requirement of promptness, the arguments made and what this means for claimants considering judicial review.
Lights, camera, litigation — The Lost King case
We explore the legal and reputational implications of dramatising ‘real life’ events for the screen.
English Devolution & Community Empowerment Bill — what it means for retail leases
We explore what the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill means in practice and how its reforms may affect both retail tenants and landlords.
Employment tribunal early conciliation period doubles to 12 weeks
Individuals who want to take an employment case to a tribunal must first take part in a longer conciliation process.
Restrictive covenant dispute — Brabners secures successful judgment for Docutech Office Solutions Ltd
Our litigation team achieved a successful outcome for Docutech Office Solutions Ltd in a major claim against a former employee and his new employer.
How the courts treat online defamation — removal order dismissed against domain name registrar
Our litigation team look an online defamation case study and how to take legal action after being subject to online defamation or harassment.
Probate costs recoverable in litigation: SCCO clarifies its position in key costs ruling
Andrew Tindall examines new guidance from the Senior Courts Costs Office on recovering probate costs.
Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry announces publication of the first part of its final report
The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Chair has announced that the first part of his final report will be published this Summer.
Defamation and harassment on social media — what to do if you’re a victim of online abuse
Our litigation team explores recent cases and what to do if you’re subjected to online defamation or harassment.
Half-secret commissions and informed consent between brokers and customers
We explore how the Courts treat customers who have been charged “half secret” commissions by their energy brokers.
Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal clarifies appropriate use of Without Prejudice labels and SLAPP guidance
Solicitor Ashley Hurst found himself at the centre of regulatory action brought by the SRA.
How to deal with a negative online review about your business
Our litigation team explores the options businesses have when it comes to dealing with negative online reviews — whether the review is honest or dishonest.
Media and communications claims — could pre-action dispute resolution become compulsory?
Here, commercial litigator Glyn Lancefield outlines the proposed changes to the pre-action protocol for media and communications claims.
Arbitration Act 2025 — new legislation to strengthen UK’s position as dispute resolution leader
Experienced commercial litigator Matthew Moy explains what arbitration is and how the AA 2025 will help to clarify and refine key aspects of the arbitration process by improving efficiency, fairness and legal certainty.
Adverse possession claims — significant judgment a ‘win’ for practicality in boundary disputes
The UK Supreme Court's judgment in Brown v Ridley and Another has important implications for adverse possession claims — particularly in boundary disputes.
High Court sides with claimants in shocking moth infestation fraud case
The High Court ruled in favour of Iya Patarkatsishvili and Yevhen Hunyak in their case against William Woodward-Fisher on claims of fraudulent misrepresentation concerning a severe moth infestation.