‘Interpreting “subject to” with business common sense’

“BlackLion, a law firm, sued its former client, Amira, for breach of contract in relation to a retainer for a proposed bond issue. The High Court held that the words ‘subject to the completion of the Matter by 31 May 2017’ in the retainer did not create a contingent fee arrangement. BlackLion was entitled to payment even though the bond issue did not complete …” (more)

[Godwin Tan, Allen and Overy – Compact Contract, 4 July]

First posted 2022-07-05 15:30:27

Leave a Reply