Английская Википедия:Bates v Post Office Ltd (No 3)
Шаблон:Short description Шаблон:Use dmy dates Шаблон:Primary sources Шаблон:Infobox Court Case
Bates v Post Office Ltd (No 3) is a part judgment[1] (the third of six), made in the group litigation order case of Bates & Others v Post Office Ltd, an English contract law case, concerning the term of good faith and the British Post Office scandal.
Case
Five hundred and fifty subpostmasters (SPMs) and others were claimants against the Post Office Limited in group litigation. The claimants argued that the Post Office's Horizon software system for sales and accounting was defective and produced false accounting shortfalls for which the Post Office then wrongly held the claimants accountable. They argued this was a breach of contract, and good faith. The Post Office argued that the claimants were responsible for the shortfalls, claiming that this represented actual money missing, and brought many prosecutions, culminating in the British Post Office scandal.
Judgment
Шаблон:Over-quotation In the High Court, Lord Justice Fraser held there was a relational contract with a duty of good faith, fair dealing and transparency in the terms on liability, payment, termination and suspension in the contract. Some provisions were too unusual and onerous to be incorporated without being drawn specially to the other party's attention. Twenty-nine bugs, errors and defects were identified and analysed in the Horizon software.
Referring to the legal textbook Chitty on Contracts, Fraser J said the following: Шаблон:Bq Fraser J continued his judgment: Шаблон:Cquote
See also
References
- ↑ Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (Judgment (No.3) "Common Issues") England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decision. Шаблон:Oscola
