ANTICIPATED CONTRACTS THAT FAIL TO MATERIALISE

In Whittle Movers Ltd v Hollywood Express Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1189, [2009] All ER (D) 128 (Nov) the Court of Appeal held that the parties had not entered into a contract, whether a contract of a long-term nature or of any other type, and that the claimant’s remedy, if any, was to be found in the law of restitution (or, if one prefers, the law of unjust enrichment). The case demonstrates that there is no necessity to find the existence of a contract in order to do justice as between parties who have carried out work while seeking to negotiate the terms of a contract. In the case where it is not possible to find the existence of a contract between the parties, resort should be had to the law of restitution in an attempt to find such a solution. On the facts of the present case the Court of Appeal directed that the claimant serve on the defendants within 28 days’ full particulars of its unjust enrichment claim.