- Cited — DnaNudge Limited v Ventura Capital GP Limited 2023-10-09
“…Finally, in Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services [2016] AC 742 (“Marks & Spencer”), the Supreme Court affirmed that a term may be implied into a contract if the test set out by Lord Simon in BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty v…”
- Cited — Secretary of State for the Home Department v James Cox & Ors. 2023-05-19
“…t exercise) from the principles of interpretation of contracts: see Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742 at [25]-[29]. Suffice it to say that it would be impossible on the facts of these appeals to conclude that any of the legitimate approaches to implication woul…”
- Cited — Vadim Don Benyatov v Credit Suisse (Securities) Europe Ltd 2023-02-17
“…f implication as a matter of fact, most recently reviewed in Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742. I will refer to the test expounded by Lord Neuberger in that case as “the necessity test” (though that is of course an inadequate shorthand).More specifically…”
- Considered — Tariq Mahmood Malik v Mahboob Hussain Jr & Ors 2023-01-11
“…terpreted before one can consider any question of implication: see Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd. [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 at [28-29] per Lord Neuberger Lord Neuberger expressed the majority decision on this point, marginalising the contrary view expressed by Lord Hoffmann in the P…”
- Approved — MARANELLO ROSSO LIMITED v LOHOMIJ BV 2022-12-21
“…In Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742, the Supreme Court confirmed and approved the traditional approach to the implication of terms. A term will be implied into a contract only if it is necessary …”
- Cited — Mark Faulkner & Ors v Vollin Holdings Limited & Ors 2022-10-21
“…rpretation of the other terms of the agreement, or by implication of terms according to the usual test outlined in Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities [2016] AC 742.…”
- Cited — Bank of New York Mellon (International) Limited v Cine-UK Limited 2022-07-27
“…noted that it was common ground that the principles of the law as to implication of terms were set out by Lord Neuberger PSC in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas [2016] AC 742 at [16] to [31] which the Master then quoted.…”
- Cited — Vneshprombank LLC v Georgy Ivanovich Bedzhamov 2022-06-24
“…[2016] AC 742, and…”
- Cited — M/V Pacific Pearl Co Limited v Osios David Shipping Inc 2022-06-14
“…sh Sky Broadcasting Ltd [1995] EMLR 472, cited by Lord Neuberger in Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742 at [19], that “it is not enough to show that had the parties foreseen the eventuality which in fact occurred they would have wished to make provision for it, u…”
- Cited — Kickabout Production Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC 2022-04-26
“…nstruction of contracts, but it did not refer there or elsewhere to Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 or other authorities on the implication of terms. At [35], which I have earlier set out, the UT stated that KPL’s reliance on what it submitted was the absence…”
- Cited — Yoo Design Services Ltd v Iliv Realty PTE Ltd 2021-04-20
“…s on the exercise of the "extraordinary" power so to intervene (see Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 ("Marks & Spencer") at [29] (citing Sir Thomas Bingham MR in Philips Electronique Grand Public SA v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd [1995] EMLR 472 at 481)).…”
- Cited — Derhalli v Derhalli 2021-02-02
“…Mr Glaser properly referred the court to Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey)Ltd and another [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742. He relied, in particular, on paras. [14] and [15] in support of his submission that where there is no express provision, an obligation can only be established…”
- Cited — Noble Chartering Inc v Priminds Shipping Hong Kong Co Ltd "Tai Prize" 2021-01-28
“…party business efficacy nor so obvious as to go without saying (cf. Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742). Indeed, it is not obvious what precisely the implied warranty would be. Would it be (as briefly discussed above, but which would not help the Owners in the p…”
- Considered — Joseph v Deloitte NSE LLP (Rev 1) 2020-11-05
“…The question must be considered as at the date of the contract. See Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742 at [18], [21], [23] and [38] (Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury).…”
- Cited — Kabab-Ji SAL (Lebanon) v Kout Food Group (Kuwait) 2020-01-20
“…e problem with that submission is that it is quite clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742, where the law on the implication of terms was authoritatively restated by Lord Neuberger PSC at [14] to [32], that (save of course where terms are implied as …”
- Cited — Fraser Turner Ltd v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Ors 2019-07-19
“…a from Wood v. Capita Insurance Services [2017] UKSC 24, Rainy Sky SA v. Kookmin Bank [2011] 1 WLR 2900, Marks & Spencer plc v. BNP Paribas Securities Services [2016] AC 742 at [18]-[21], and BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v. Shire of Hastings (1977) 180 CLR 266 at 283.…”
- Cited — Equitas Insurance Ltd v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd 2019-04-17
“…hether a term must be implied is to be judged at the date when the contract was made (see Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742, para 23) and that when the relevant reinsurance contracts were made the parties could not have foreseen the situation that has arisen as a result of the law’s…”
- Cited — Triple Point Technology, Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd 2019-03-05
“…payment. Mr Stafford relies on the judgment of Lord Neuberger in Marks and Spencer PLC v BNP Parabis Securities Services Trust Co. (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 at [21]. He submits that without the suggested implied term the contract would lack practical coherence.…”
- Cited — Duval v 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd 2018-10-18
“…ecessary to give commercial or practical coherence to the contract: Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72, [2016] AC 742 at [21].…”
- Cited — Ukraine v The Law Debenture Trust Corporation Plc (Rev 1) 2018-09-14
“…a misunderstanding of the meaning of the business efficacy test. In Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Lts [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 at [21] Lord Neuberger PSC suggested that “a more helpful” way of expressing Lord Simon’s requirement would be that the term would only be implied if “without …”
- Cited — Ukraine v The Law Debenture Trust Corporation Plc (Rev 1) 2018-09-14
“…As stated by Lord Neuberger PSC in Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd and another [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742, at [15], there were two types of contractual implied term. The first was a term which was implied into a particular contract, in the light of the express term…”
- Cited — Ukraine v The Law Debenture Trust Corporation Plc (Rev 1) 2018-09-14
“… been conclusively determined by the Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd and another [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 at [21] – [31], the exercise of implication of terms is not to be classified as part of the exercise of interpretation, or construction, of the terms of a cont…”
- Cited — Al Jaber & Anor v Al Ibrahim & Anor 2018-07-18
“…ent for present purposes to refer to the judgment of Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury PSC in Marks & Spencer plc v. BNP Paribas Securities Services Co (Jersey) Ltd [2016] AC 742 at [14]-[21]. Since this analysis was itself a synthesis of earlier cases, including a reference to, and adoption of, the five principles for implying contract…”
- Cited — Elite Property Holdings Ltd & Anor v Barclays Bank Plc 2018-07-17
“…had not sought to demonstrate how these satisfied the test of necessity which the Supreme Court in Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 has recently restated has to be satisfied before a term will be implied (see per Lord Neuberger PSC at [17]-[18]).…”
- Applied — Bou-Simon v BGC Brokers LP 2018-07-05
“…dentified the correct test for the implication of contractual terms, to be found in Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2016] AC 742, he did not apply it properly. There is no dispute as to the test itself or the type of contractual implied term with which this case is concerned. It is a ter…”
- Cited — Bou-Simon v BGC Brokers LP 2018-07-05
“…(Jersey) Ltd [2016] AC 742, restoring orthodoxy in this field, the exercise of construction and the exercise of implication of terms into a contract are different kinds of exercise. It i…”
- Cited — London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Ors 2018-04-20
“…s of determining the scope and meaning of an instrument is an iterative one: Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72; [2016] AC 742 at [28]; Impact Funding Solutions Ltd v Barrington Support Services Ltd [2016] UKSC 57; [2017] AC 73 at [31]; Trump at [33] and [42]; Dunnett at [34]. The obje…”
- Cited — J N Hipwell & Son v Szurek 2018-03-28
“…y been reviewed, and in some respects reformulated, by the Supreme Court in Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd and anr [2016] AC 742.…”