First 519 words of the document:
Home Counties Dairies - 16 Marker Restraint of Trade - Watson v Prager - 16
The case involves the law use of the Blue Pencilling approach. The case involved HCD
restraining/ preventing Skilton selling milk or dairy produce to customers of HCD. It was held
that "dairy produce" was too wide and it was carved out. The case involves the law on exclusive service arrangements within the ROT doctrine. A
boxer being restrained from services from another manager for 3 years and another 3 years
if he became a champion. It was held to be unreasonable as the added 3 years was too
The case is significant as it shows how the courts will impose a restraint if there is an
"interest meriting protection", but they will only sever a clause if precise language has been
used. The significance of this case is its recognition in the ROT doctrine despite being an exclusive
service arrangement. Its significant in developing the law as it represents a change in judicial
The court in this case blue pencilled despite the traditional attitude of judges severing where views in dealing with transactions of this type.
parties are in an unequal bargaining position. The case represents how the judges have This is evident through judges decisions where they stated that "Later decisions have, in
taken a broad approach in interpreting a clause creating a result which reflects the parties particular made it clear that a contract is..." (S5, L26-28). As the case fell into the doctrine, the
intentions in creating justice between the parties. 2 conditions laid down in Nordenfelt applied. They found the agreement wasn't in the
interests of the parties or the public.
The case can be contrasted with Lyne-Pirkis v Jones where they refused to sever because The case shows how judges recognised the nature of the relationship of the parties and
imprecise language was used as blue pencilling wasn't available. However, the courts where a conflict of interest exists there is a protection of the person in the weaker party and
approach to blue pencilling can be seen in cases such as "Goldsoll v Goldman", where weaker bargaining strength.
parties were in an equal bargaining position and the courts left a clause preventing the
vendor from participating in selling imitation jewellery in the UK. The courts have adopted a similar line or meaning in earlier cases such as Esso. It shows
how judges have become more flexible and more fluid, following Lord Wilberforce's
statement which is clear that "the categories can never be closed" (S1, L27). The courts
The lords also blue pencilled in Esso where the courts struck down the 21 year agreement as recognised the ROT doctrine falling within the music industry as in the case of Schroeder
it was too excessive in nature and it wasn't in the interests of the parties or the public. Music v Macaulay in source 6.
Other pages in this set
Here's a taster:
Restraint of Trade - Schroeder 16 Marker
The case involves the law on exclusive service arrangements which fall within the ROT
Restraint of Trade - Alec Lobb - 16 Marker doctrine. The case itself involved a young artist tied into a 5-10 year agreement assigning all
responsibility to Schroeder Music.…read more