< Zurück zu den aktuellen Neuigkeiten & Events

Articles

Do I really need a contract?

Juli 2019

From a lawyer’s perspective, in an ideal world, all business relationships would have a clearly written and concise contract in place setting out what the parties have agreed to do, what they are getting paid and how any risks associated with the contract will be managed.

In reality, however, time and resource can get in the way and many business relationships are carried out under contract terms which are unclear or not appropriate for the work and in some cases based only on a discussion or handshake or even nothing at all. Quite often, the risks of carrying out work with deficient contracts does not materialise as the work is done, the payments are made and everybody stays happy. However, when issues do arise, not having an appropriate document in place can make things a whole lot worse and, if the parties end up litigating, a lot more expensive. Parties can end up spending more time and money on what they had agreed or intended to agree in the first place before even considering the specific issue in dispute.

What is a contract?

For a valid contract to exist, there needs to be:

(i) an offer;

(ii) acceptance of that offer;

(iii) consideration (payment or a reciprocal promise); and

(iv) an intention to create legal relations with certainty of terms.

While the easiest way to ensure a contract has been successfully formed is to have a signed agreement or terms in place (a properly executed Deed is a requirement for certain transactions), correspondence (including email) can be used to construct the terms of an agreement and certain terms will be implied by law. Where there is no chain of correspondence to establish terms, the common law rule of quantum meruit can be used. This means that a court would look at what work was carried out and what would be a reasonable payment for that work.

Moorgate Capital v HIG European Capital

Both the question of contract formation and the quantum meruit rule were considered in the recent case of Moorgate Capital v HIG European Capital. In this case, Moorgate (a corporate finance advisor) sought a £1million success fee from HIG (a private equity firm) for the services and ‘introduction’ it provided in connection with a corporate acquisition by HIG. Moorgate claimed the terms of the instruction had been discussed and agreed with HIG at a London drinks reception, however, the existence of an oral contract (including whether the parties intended to create legal relations at all) was swiftly dismissed by the judge. The judge then went on to focus on whether Moorgate had the right to claim for payment for the services carried out under the rule of quantum meruit. The judge also dismissed this claim and deemed no payment was due.

Merely Risk-Taking?

The court’s view was that Moorgate had carried out the work, with no written agreement in place, with a hope that they might get paid or receive some other form of benefit having carried out the work, and as such was ‘in the circumstances of this case, merely a risk-taker’. In dismissing this claim the court also significantly wrote down the amount Moorgate would have been entitled to even if an oral contract had been formed, stating a figure of £25,600 rather than the £1million claimed.

Whether or not your business enters in to relationships as a ‘risk taker’ or not, this case has a strong lesson for those who conduct business without anything written down or on insufficient terms. If you have a properly executed agreement or set of terms, then it is significantly more difficult to argue that no contract is in place or that no payment is due. Getting both parties to clearly set out their expectations within a written document is also the most effective way of avoiding future disputes. While it may not come across as a priority, when entering in to a relationship, getting appropriate terms agreed will ensure you either get paid or get what you expect to pay for as well as having certainty of the terms on which you are doing business. Having these in place will make managing disputes significantly easier as well as less costly.

If the contract is signed, put in a drawer, and never seen again – this is still better than having nothing to get out of the drawer if things don’t go to plan.

 

This update was prepared by HGF Legal Director Michelle Davies and Senior IP Solicitor James Talbot.

Aktuelle Neuigkeiten

Empowered, Not Replaced: The Risks and Rewards of Using AI Tools in Patent Prosecution

With the rapid rise of AI and extreme hype around generative AI tools in the workplace, patent firms around the world have had to seriously consider to what extent they …

Weiterlesen

EU Agrees on NGT Plant Regulation: What It Means for Patents and Licensing

The European Parliament and Council have reached a provisional agreement for plants developed using New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) – below we summarise the main points and set out the requirements …

Weiterlesen

When Retail Branding Meets Politics

(Inter IKEA Systems v Algemeen Vlaams Belang (Case C‑298/23) In November 2022, the Flemish political party Vlaams Belang presented its “IKEA-PLAN – Immigratie Kan Echt Anders” (“Immigration Really Can Be Different”). …

Weiterlesen

Büro geschlossen – Dezember 2025 / Januar 2026

HGF Büro geschlossen – Dezember 2025 / Januar 2026   UK Donnerstag, 25. und Freitag, 26. Dezember 2025 GESCHLOSSEN Donnerstag, 1. Januar 2026* GESCHLOSSEN * Freitag, 2. Januar 2026 – …

Weiterlesen

Oft kopiert, nie erreicht: Wann werden Alltagsgegenstände zum Gegenstand des Urheberrechts?

Die Grenze zwischen „reinen“ Kunstwerken und bloßen Gebrauchsgegenständen – Können ikonische, aber alltägliche Produkte urheberrechtlich geschützt werden? Die obige Frage wurde vom Generalanwalt in den verbundenen Rechtssachen C‑580/23 und C‑795/23 …

Weiterlesen

T 0883/23: Dosierungsansprüche und ihr Anspruch auf Priorität, wenn in der Prioritätsanmeldung nur das Protokoll der klinischen Studie offengelegt wurde

In einer kürzlich ergangenen Entscheidung der Beschwerdekammer (BoA) des EPA entschied die BoA, dass Ansprüche, die auf eine Kombination von pharmazeutischen Wirkstoffen (APIs) in bestimmten Dosen gerichtet sind, keinen Anspruch …

Weiterlesen

Das Ende des Brexit-Überhangs für Marken: Überprüfung, Neuanmeldung und Widerruf.

Am 31. Dezember 2025 sind fünf Jahre seit dem Ende der Brexit-Übergangsperiode am 31. Dezember 2020 vergangen. Warum ist das relevant? Für im Vereinigten Königreich geklonte Markenregistrierungen, die infolge des …

Weiterlesen
Event - 14. Januar 2026

Seminar über Die Folgen von G1/24 – hat sich etwas geändert?

HGF veranstaltet ein Seminar zum Thema Die Folgen von G1/24 – hat sich etwas geändert? Im Anschluss daran folgen Networking, Apero und Snacks. Das Seminar findet am Mittwoch, den 14. …

Veranstaltungsdetails