HomeAccessibilityIndependent approachTurnaround timeCommunication skillsFee structures
solicitors - commercial legal work

Arbitration & mediation
Assets/shares buy/sell
Business start ups
Commercial & transactions
Company law & compliance
Competition law (UK & EU)
Confidentiality & privacy
Construction & building
Contracts drafting
Conveyancing (commercial)
Copyright (infringement & licensing)
Debt recovery & winding up
Designs (registration & infringement)
Directors' duties & liabilities
E-commerce contracts
Employment (contracts, regulations & claims)
Franchising
Intellectual property
Joint ventures
Libel (defamation)
Licensing (premises)
Litigation (commercial)
Music & entertainment
Negligence (general)
Partnerships
Passing-off claims
Patents (infringement)
Planning representation
Professional (regulatory)
Professional negligence
Reinsurance & insurance
Shareholders
Software (licensing)
Sports contracts
Trade marks (trademarks)

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 intellectual-property@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



Humphreys & Co., solicitors Bristol



Also recommended by The Legal 500 Europe, Middle East and Africa 2009 - 2010.


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

© Copyright Humphreys & Co. Solicitors

Home Page