Penalty clauses in the Supreme Court: a legitimately interesting decision?

Lindsay, B. (2016) Penalty clauses in the Supreme Court: a legitimately interesting decision? Edinburgh Law Review, 20(2), pp. 204-210. (doi:10.3366/elr.2016.0342)

[img]
Preview
Text
152834.pdf - Accepted Version

540kB

Abstract

The joint appeals in Cavendish Square Holdings v El Makdessi and Beavis v ParkingEye 1 offered the UK Supreme Court its first opportunity – since moving across Parliament Square – to consider the penalty doctrine. The exercise of judicial control over contractually stipulated remedies has long been controversial and the joint appeals presented an opportunity either to modernise the doctrine's principles or to repudiate it entirely from English law.

Item Type:Articles
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Lindsay, Mr Bobby
Authors: Lindsay, B.
College/School:College of Social Sciences > School of Law
Journal Name:Edinburgh Law Review
Publisher:Edinburgh University Press
ISSN:1364-9809
ISSN (Online):1755-1692
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2016 Edinburgh Law Review Trust and the Contributors
First Published:First published in Edinburgh Law Review 20(2): 204-210
Publisher Policy:Reproduced in accordance with the publisher copyright policy

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record