Cavendish v Makdessi | ParkingEye v Beavis (2015) | Contract Law | Liquidated Damages and Penalties

The joint appeals of Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi and ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 marked the Supreme Court’s judicial reform of the contractual penalties doctrine. The justices departed from the previous common law Dunlop test, and established a new test which revolved around three key components: (i) secondary obligation, (ii) the absence of a legitimate interest, (iii) disproportionality. 00:00 Introduction 00:20 Facts of Cavendish v Makdessi 2:20 Facts of ParkingEye v Beavis 2:51 Legal background (The old Dunlop test) 4:46 Judgment (The new test) 6:29 Judgment (Secondary obligation) 8:14 Judgment (Disguised penalty) 8:42 Judgment (Legitimate interest) 10:04 Judgment (Disproportionality) 10:49 Judgment (Type of detriment) 11:56 Application to Clause 5.1 in Cavendish v Makdessi 14:11 Application to Clause 5.6 in Cavendish v Makdessi 16:17 Application to ParkingEye v Beavis Disclaimer: Nothing in this video or description constitutes legal advice. This video is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your lawyer to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form a lawyer-client relationship. All non-licensed clips are used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. Tags: contract, enforceability, liquidate damages, remedies, breach of contract, penalty, dunlop test What is the Dunlop test? How did the Supreme Court change the law of contractual penalties? When is a clause a penalty? When is a clause a liquidated damages clause? What are penalty clauses under English contract law? #law #englishlaw #contractlaw #gdl #pgdl #llb #bptc #commonlaw #civillaw #bptc #bpc Edexcel, AQA, CIE, A level, Cambridge, Oxford, Solicitor, Barrister