Court of Appeal implies term as to price of additional product under sale of goods contract (KSY Juice Blends UK Limited v Citrosuco GmbH)
Commercial analysis: This was a sale of goods dispute, in which the parties had agreed the price of a fixed quantity of product, with the price for additional product to be fixed at a later date, in order to allow for market volatility. When the parties did not agree on the price for the additional product, one party used that as an excuse to argue that there was no binding agreement with regard to that additional product.The Commercial Court decided that it was not appropriate to imply a term as to what the price for the additional product should be. There was, therefore, no binding agreement with regard to the additional product.The Court of Appeal has now disagreed and found that, on the facts of this case, a term could be implied into the contract that the price for the additional product should be the reasonable or market price (which, the Court of Appeal said, were the same thing). Dimitris Anassis, partner, and Reema Shour, professional support lawyer, both at Hill Dickinson, consider the court’s decision in KSY Juice Blends UK Ltd v Citrosuco GmbH.