000			01758cad a22002175a 4500
001			L144527
008			080725e20080618xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u144527
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aChilli Developments Ltd v Commission for the New Towns _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2008
520			_a[2008] EWHC 1310 (QB) 18 June 2008. Case found that the Commission for the New Towns had not breached exlusivity agreements with a developer (relating to the regeneration of docklands in Middlesborough) and had not acted in bad faith during the lifetime of the agreements. Claimant (C) claimed damages from purported breaches of lock-out or exclusivity agreements from Tees Valley Regeneration Ltd (T) (an urban regeneration body), asserting that T had induced the Commission to breach these agreements. The Commission argued that C had failed to bring its own development proposals to fruition, despite extension of the exclusivity agreements. Held: the defendants had acted in good faith throughout and claims that C had misled T as to the likelihood of entering a development agreement were not supported by documentary evidence. C had remained the preferred developer throughout, as was evinced by their willingness to enter into the initial agreements and to extend them despite the fact that agreements had not been met by T.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aCHILLI DEVELOPMENTS LTD V COMMISSION FOR THE NEW TOWNS
650	2	4	_aWALFORD V MILES
650	2	4	_aPETROMEC INC V PETROLEO BRASILEIRO SA
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-PROPERTY MANAGEMENT-REGENERATION
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2008/1310.html _zView the item free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c80509 _d80509