Report comment

The key point to be drawn from Devon is it makes clear that the triviality will only be taken into account when considered alongside the conduct leading up until the breach. The relevant passage, is as follows (para 10 of the Judgment):

“Here, it is at least questionable whether in the current climate, the fact (which I consider to be established) that Celtic was making no attempt to engage constructively with the process of Devon's application on 20 December 2013 other than to stave off the application for an interim injunction by belatedly calling for an invoice amounts to "reasonable excuse" for the purposes of paragraph 9.6.”

This makes clear that it is not just the fact that the breach itself was trivial, but also the Judge took into account the conduct in advance which made a qualification that the breach was trivial and that there was a reasonable excuse for the breach. The case distinguishes (albeit perhaps inadvertently) the breach of 18 minutes could be considered trivial because of the prior conduct that went on between the parties; what this then suggests by silent implication, is that there can be situations where there is no conduct leading up to to the breach which can be considered to support a “reasonable excuse”, and therefore even a trivial breach can be penalised by under the new regime where there is “no reasonable excuse” for that breach.

Certainly, when a statement of costs is handed across on the day of the hearing, well over the 24 hour rule, with no reasonable excuse, it is clear that the principles in Devon will see that the breach is not regarded as trivial, in contract with the 18 minute delay in Devon which was excusable (given the prior conduct of the parties).