Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd, Court of Appeal - Commercial Court, July 17, 2008, [2008] EWHC 1686 (Comm),[2008] 2 Lloyd's Rep 581,[2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 16

Reporting Judge: [2008] EWHC 1686 (Comm),[2008] 2 Lloyd's Rep 581,[2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 16

President: Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd

Linked as:

Extract

Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd, Court of Appeal - Commercial Court, July 17, 2008, [2008] EWHC 1686 (Comm),[2008] 2 Lloyd's Rep 581,[2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 16

Neutral Citation Number: [2008] EWHC 1686 (Comm)

Case No: 2008-126

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

COMMERCIAL COURT

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 17/07/2008

Before :

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE AIKENS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr George McPherson (instructed by Allen & Overy, Solicitors, London)) for the Claimant

Mr Neil Vickery (instructed by TWM, Solicitors LLP, Reigate, Surrey) for the Defendant

Hearing dates: 11th June 2008

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgment

MR JUSTICE AIKENS :

1. This is an application by the claimant (``Trident''), for summary judgment of its claim against the defendant (``FFCL'') pursuant to CPR Part 24. Trident is a company which owns and leases commercial aircraft. FFCL is one of India's leading express courier companies with a very large annual turnover.

2. On 5th September 2005, Trident entered into two Aircraft Operating Lease Agreements with FFCL (``the Lease Agreements''). Under each Lease Agreement, Trident, as the lessor, agreed to lease to FFCL, as lessee, an ATP type aircraft manufactured by BAE System Regional Aircraft Limited (``BAE''). The two aircraft had the serial numbers 2051 and 2054. I will refer to them respectively as ``Aircraft 2051'' and ``Aircraft 2054''.

3. The two Lease Agreements are in identical terms. I will refer below to the relevant clauses of the contracts.

4. Trident's claims arise under both Lease Agreements. In short, Trident alleges that it is entitled to summary judgment because FFCL was in breach of its obligation to pay rent under each of the two contracts. Trident claims that the continuing failure of FFCL to pay rent entitled it to terminate both Lease Agreements and to recover possession of the two aircraft.

5. Trident claims three principal types of loss. First, it claims unpaid rent of US$405,333.30. Secondly, it claims the costs of putting the two aircraft into a proper ``Re-delivery Condition''. This claim is for US$2,053,926. Thirdly, Trident claims damages equal to the estimated further loss of rent until the aircraft were re-leased. This claim is for US$576,000. In addition, Trident claims interest on late payment of rent (US$7,591.02) and estimated legal costs of US$39,868.90. Trident alleges that it is entitled to these last two sums pursuant to various clauses in the Lease Agreements.

6. Trident has a further claim. This is for damages for conversion, which are said to arise out of FFCL's failure promptly to return the aircraft to Trident after it had terminated the Lease Agreements.

A. The Outline Facts

7. In 2004 FFCL wished to buy or lease cargo aircraft to carry express cargo across India to different destinations. FFCL appointed Taneja Aerospace and Aviation Limited (``TAAL'') as a ...

See the full content of this document