Loss of profits: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
===[[Tricks for young players]]=== | ===[[Tricks for young players]]=== | ||
If you exclude liability for “[[consequential loss]] ''including [[loss of profits]]” that will not immunise you from liability for losses of profits that were [[direct loss]]es. {{cite|Polypearl Limited|E.ON Energy Solutions Limited|2014|EWHC|3045}}. | If you exclude liability for “[[consequential loss]] ''including [[loss of profits]]''” that will not immunise you from liability for losses of profits that were [[direct loss]]es. {{cite|Polypearl Limited|E.ON Energy Solutions Limited|2014|EWHC|3045}}. | ||
{{Polypearl Eon headnote}} | {{Polypearl Eon headnote}} | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
Revision as of 14:26, 18 December 2019
|
Not the same thing as consequential loss, though in many cases it is a type of consequential loss. It is possible for a loss of profits or loss of opportunity to be a direct loss, although the great case of Hadley v Baxendale illustrates that is by no means the ordinary run of things.
Tricks for young players
If you exclude liability for “consequential loss including loss of profits” that will not immunise you from liability for losses of profits that were direct losses. Polypearl Limited v E.ON Energy Solutions Limited [2014] EWHC 3045.
In Polypearl Limited v E.ON Energy Solutions Limited [2014] EWHC 3045 Polypearl entered a contract with E.ON under which E.On had to buy 153,000m3 of cavity wall adhesive. Don’t laugh — this is someone’s livelihood. E.ON failed to purchase it, and as a result Polypearl suffered a loss of profit on the actual sale of those contracts of over two million quid (essentially its revenue less costs of production). Polypearl also claimed a loss of opportunity to share in carbon savings it would have made had the contract been performed.
E.On claimed exclusion for liability for “any indirect or consequential loss, (both of which include, without limitation, pure economic loss, loss of profit, loss of business, depletion of goodwill and like loss) howsoever caused (including as a result of negligence)”
The Judge found this a good example of a loss of profit that was a direct loss, and that this liability was not therefore excluded by that exclusion. Sensible outcome reached.