HomeAccessibilityIndependent approachTurnaround timeCommunication skillsFee structures
solicitors -  commercial legal work

Arbitration
Assets/shares buy/sell
Commercial advice
Company law
Company start ups
Competition law
Confidentiality
Construction & building
Contract advice
Conveyancing
Copyright
Debt recovery
Design rights
Directors duties
Discrimination
Dismissal law
E-commerce
Employment
European law
Franchising
Infringement
Insurance
Intellectual property
Joint ventures
Libel
Licensing (premises)
Litigation (commercial)
Merchandising
Music & entertainment
Negligence (general)
Partnerships
Passing-off
Patents
Planning
Professional negligence
Redundacy
Reinsurance
Shareholders
Software
Sponsorship
Sports contracts
Trade Marks (Trademarks)
Unfair dismissal

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY - CONTRACT COMPUTERS : DATA STORAGE : DATABASES : DATABASE SYSTEMS : QUOTATIONS : INDIVIDUAL STORE FILES
 
The word "database" in a quotation to recover email data from computerised tapes referred to a MS Exchange Database and not to a backup file or Personal Store file. VOGON INTERNATIONAL LTD V SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE (2004) CA (Lord Philips MR, May LJ, parker LJ) 4/2/2004 The claimant (V) appealed against the declaration of Seymour J that the word "database" in a quotation to recover email data from computerised tapes referred to a MS Exchange Database. The defendant (D) was carrying out investigations on a case and required email data recovered from computerised tapes. V was engaged as a contractor to carry out the data recovery on the basis of a quotation from V which included the phrase "Set-up and population MS Exchange Database £1,500 per database". On completion of the works V invoiced D for £314,375 on the basis that the phrase "per database" referred either to individual Personal Store files (PST) which were a type of database in which the email data had been stored or to a backup file containing data. D contended that "per database" was to be construed as referring to each MS Exchange Database and that on that basis V was entitled to £22,500. On V's claim for the full amount Seymour J decided the construction of "database" in favour of D and awarded V £22,500. HELD: The word "database" referred to a MS Exchange Database and not to an individual backup file or PST, as that construction was consonant with the description of the work carried out. In addition that construction produced a commercially sensible amount for the work carried out. Appeal dismissed. Lawtel: 9th February 2004
E-mail us with details of your enquiry on contract-advice@humphreys.co.uk
Include your telephone number,
fax number and address.

Tel (0117) (international +44 117) 929 2662 
Fax (0117) (international +44 117) 929 2722




Relevant material




INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY - CONTRACT
 
Mistake - Mistake of fact - Scope of doctrine of equitable rescission
 
ESTOPPEL
 
Offer and acceptance - consideration
 
Contract - estoppel - media and entertainment
 
Court will not import term to protect employer’s business
 


Humphreys & Co., solicitors Bristol



Click here for information about the work we do for private clients.

© Copyright Humphreys & Co., solicitors

Home Page