Shearman v Hunter Boot [2014]


  • Hunter Boots terminated its sales agency agreement with Charles Shearman
  • The contract provided that regulation 17 of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 would entitle Shearman to either an indemnity or compensation, whichever was lower
  • Compensation would equate to about £1.5 million; an indemnity would be capped at about £200,000


  • Was Shearman entitled to compensation or an indemnity?


  • Compensation


  • A principal must decide absolutely whether an indemnity or compensation will be provided under regulation 17; a conditional choice was not acceptable
  • As the term was ineffective, the default compensatory position would be adopted by the parties
RELATED CASE  Bolton Partners v Lambert (1889)

Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 1st January 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy