Triple Point Technology: At Speed 1

The Supreme Court has now handed down its decision in Triple Point Technology, Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd[1].

There were two main issues before the Supreme Court:

• Issue 1: Was PTT entitled to liquidated damages for delay in respect of work which had not been completed before the contract was terminated? The Supreme Court unanimously found that it was.
• Issue 2: Did an exception from the contractual cap on damages for "negligence" remove from the cap losses caused by Triple Point's negligent breach of contract or only losses for the commission of some independent tort? The majority (3-2) found that losses for Triple Point's negligent breach of contract were removed from the cap. The leading judgment is given by Lady Arden. Lord Leggatt gave a concurring judgment (with which Lord Burrows agreed). Lord Sales, with whom Lord Hodge agreed, gave a dissenting judgment.

In this first of a series of three posts published this week, Ruth Keating sets the scene by reviewing the decisions at first instance[2] and in the Court of Appeal[3]. We will consider Issue 1 In the second post and Issue 2 in the third post.

You can read the full post on our Commercial, Construction & International Arbitration Blog here.