Coys of Kensington Automobile Ltd.

vs Tiziana Pugliese
1 3
Characters Case & Contentions
Coys of Kensington Automobiles Ltd. Plaintiff: Kensington Defendant: Tiziana
hereinafter Kensington Court Jurisdiction: High Court of UK
Auction Company Specializing in Motor
Cars Incorporated in England Tiziana’s Claim: Contract not binding on many counts

Tiziana Pugliese hereinafter Tiziana Points of Contention:

An Italian National visiting Monaco, the 1. Incorporation of Catalogue
auction venue 2. Foreign Language & Incomprehension
3. Sign at the Wrong Part of the Page
4. Area of jurisdiction
2
Case Background
Tiziana’s bid is highest.
Auction Manager Tiziana
Tiziana fills registration ”Sold!”
Kensington to conduct conducts telephone
an auction in Monaco
form for phone bidding.
auction. Tiziana places bid
She is awarded the refuses
Registered as a bidder contract. Company sends to pay!
on phone on the day.
auction bill.
Both on-site & phone 1. Enters her contact details
bidding options 2. Mentions lot number, shows
available interest for ‘247’ ’Bentley’

LAB Presentation – Contracts and Finality of Signature Section E | Group 2

Coys of Kensington Automobile Ltd. vs Tiziana Pugliese
Contention 1:
• Incorporation of Catalogue

Tiziana’s Claim
• She knew nothing of the catalogue issued which had details of
the auction of the car
• She had no knowledge of the conditions of the auction

Court’s Response
• Since the front page of the form she had signed had the
following line:
‘All bids shall be treated as offers made within the ‘Conditions of
business’ and ‘Important Notice’ printed in the catalogue:
o Such a reference is sufficient for a consensus
o It is not necessary for the catalogue to be present and in
Tiziana’s possession at that time for consensus.

Conclusion
Watch out for any separate document/catalogue that has the terms &
conditions of the contract you sign.

LAB Presentation – Contracts and Finality of Signature Section E | Group 2

Coys of Kensington Automobile Ltd. vs Tiziana Pugliese
Contention 2:
• Incomprehension due to not knowing the language

Tiziana’s Claim
• Tiziana claimed that she did not understand the foreign language and
therefore could not comprehend what the document terms entailed

Court’s Response
• Tiziana understood enough English of the form that she was able to complete the boxes
• Having completed and signed a form, she cannot avoid its consequences by saying that
she did not read it or understand it

Conclusion
• A party who completes and signs a document cannot avoid its consequences by citing inability to read/understand
the language

LAB Presentation – Contracts and Finality of Signature Section E | Group 2

Coys of Kensington Automobile Ltd. vs Tiziana Pugliese
Contention 3:
• Sign at the Wrong Part of the Page

Tiziana’s Claim
• The signature was not immediately under or even near the relevant
words, which were at the bottom of the page.
• The Form did not contain words such as ‘I agree to be bound by the
terms and conditions.’

Court’s Response
• Tiziana did complete the table that was below the signature.
• Objectively, signature considered to be an acknowledgement
of the terms of the form

Conclusion
• A contract is seen as a whole and not in parts.
• Location of one’s signature on the form is immaterial.

LAB Presentation – Contracts and Finality of Signature Section E | Group 2

Coys of Kensington Automobile Ltd. vs Tiziana Pugliese
Contention 4:
• Area of Jurisdiction

Tiziana’s Claim
The jurisdiction clause was unusual as-
• It came after the signature, under the heading “Governing Law” in the catalogue.
• Furthermore, it was in small print and wasn’t signposted.
• Moreover according to the EU directive, person to be sued at the place where he/she is domiciled.

Court’s Response
• Not necessary to have a special reference to jurisdiction clause.
• Additionally, a member state can have the jurisdiction to settle disputes subject to agreement from
both parties in writing or evidenced in writing.

Conclusion
• T&C attached to the form (catalogues/in small print) are binding on the party.
• Contract document is seen as a whole, and location of signature is immaterial.

LAB Presentation – Contracts and Finality of Signature Section E | Group 2

Coys of Kensington Automobile Ltd. vs Tiziana Pugliese
In a signed form, it is the
responsibility of the signatory to
check for additional terms and The signature on the document is to
condition documents in the contract, be taken as a support for the person
including clauses in fine print. knowing the language of the form.

Area of the jurisdiction agreed upon The location of signature on the

in the contract is binding. Contract form is not a relevant consideration.
document is taken as a whole.

LAB Presentation – Contracts and Finality of Signature Section E | Group 2