Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi
English contract law case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi [2015] UKSC 67, together with its companion case ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, are English contract law cases concerning the validity of penalty clauses and (in relation to ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis) the application of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Directive. The UK Supreme Court ruled on both cases together on 4 November 2015, updating the established legal rule on penalty clauses and replacing the test of whether or not a disputed clause is "a genuine pre-estimate of loss" with a test asking whether it imposed a proportionate detriment in relation to any "legitimate interest" of the innocent party.[1]
Cavendish Square BV v Makdessi and ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis | |
---|---|
Court | Supreme Court of the United Kingdom |
Full case name | Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi |
Decided | 4 November 2015 |
Citation(s) | [2015] UKSC 67 |
Case history | |
Prior action(s) | Cavendish Square Holdings BV v Makdessi [2013] EWCA Civ 1539 |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | |
Keywords | |
Penalty clause, Consumer, unfair terms |
Commentators on the ruling have noted that "these cases provide some welcome clarification to the law in this area".[2]