Both parties were involved in providing services in the music touring industry and had worked with major stars, but the claim was, at first glance, a straightforward claim for unpaid storage charges arising out of an oral contract to keep catering equipment at the Claimant’s premises. However, the dispute raised interesting questions about the exercise of liens, conversion, and contractual construction.
The court agreed with the Claimant that there was no contractual requirement for a demand by way of invoice nor was it a term that further catering contracts would be provided to the Defendant by the Claimant. It was also decided that termination had not occurred at an early stage when the means of access to the premises was changed, but only when the first demand for return of the goods was made which was not until the counterclaim was issued. The court rejected the Claimant’s purported exercise of a lien although agreed with James’ submissions on the historic case law that, in the circumstances of this case, there would have been an entitlement to continue charging storage charges whilst exercising a lien, had it been exercisable.
The court entered judgment for c. £140,000 representing storage charges up to the date of the counterclaim in favour of the Claimant and an order for delivery up of the goods in favour of the Defendant.
Many thanks to Clementine Selby and Mia Abel at Trethowans for their assistance and support in achieving a great result for the client.
