Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: [2005] EWCA Civ 973
    • Member State: United Kingdom
    • Common Name:Bryen & Langley Ltd v Boston
    • Decision type: Other
    • Decision date: 29/07/2005
    • Court: Court of Appeal Civil Division
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff:
    • Defendant:
    • Keywords:
  • Directive Articles
    Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 2 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 1.
  • Headnote
    Unfair terms - construction contract - standard form contract
  • Facts
    Boston was a consumer who had contracted with B&L for some building work. Boston had the advice of a surveyor, who had also helped with the tendering and contracting process. In particular, the JCT Standard Form Contract had been selected as the basis for the contract. This included an Adjudication Clause, which was subsequently challenged
  • Legal issue
  • Decision

    The court had to consider whether the clause would be unfair. It observed that a two-stage test applied: (i) was there a significant imbalance and (ii) was this contrary to good faith? As the House of Lords had given “good faith” a procedural and substantive meaning. With regard to the procedural aspect, it was noted that in this case, the relevant term had not been imposed on Boston; rather, the consumer’s agent (the surveyor) had effectively imposed the term on the supplier. There was no absence of fair dealing or good faith in the conclusion of the contract, and consequently, the term could not be unfair.

    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result