The Negotiations Representation
The Negotiations Representation
CVS said that the Defendants represented that negotiations with Apple and LVMH were at an advanced stage, and Apple and LVMH had commented on draft contractual documents during those negotiations.
CVS argued that the Negotiations Representation was made in the 9 February 2021 Email, by Mr Bonnier offering to provide Aaqua’s “individual draft tactical funding revenue contribution agreements with Apple and LVMH” and indicating that draft Tactical Partner Playbooks with Apple/LVMH existed and were nearing finalisation.
CVS say that the representation was repeated in Mr Bonnier’s 14 February 2021 Email, to which he attached the Draft Framework Agreement and in which he referred to the agreement as including the “latest three way inputs” and stated that it would:
“continue to iterate over the next several weeks until we definitively conclude”.
Mr Smith said that he understood from this that the Draft Framework Agreement was in advanced form and had been reviewed, and commented on, by Apple.
Mr Bonnier does not deny that what he refers to as the “Extra-Contractual Statements” in the emails were made.
- Heading
- Introduction
- CVS’s witnesses
- Mr Smith
- Mr McQuade
- Mr Sargent
- Mr Foy
- Mr Hendren
- The facts
- Procedural history
- The Debarring Order
- Mr Bonnier’s Article 6 rights
- Mr Joel Hogarth
- Standard of Proof
- CVS’s case
- The Honest Belief in Investment Representation
- The Conditions Precedent Representation
- The Negotiations Representation
- Falsity
- Knowledge
- Intention
- Mr Bonnier’s intention in light of Aaqua’s financing
- The Aaqua App’s lack of functionality
- Reliance
- The Defendants’ case
- The Defendants’ submissions on Intention and the contractual provisions
- Estoppel
- Intention
- Summary of findings on liability
- Quantum
- Mitigation of loss
- Conclusions
![CL-2022-000367 - [2025] EWHC 2877 (Comm)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_WAai98v.png)