Varying a contract

Over the course of a commercial arrangement, there will be occasions when a written contract needs to be varied or amended to reflect the changing needs of the parties or environment within which they are operating. Written contracts will either contain a prohibition on any variation or allow changes to be made, perhaps on the condition that such changes are in writing and signed off by the parties or their authorised representatives. A person purporting to vary and amend a contract must have the authority to do so.

An agreement that does not need to be in writing (or evidenced by it) may be varied by the oral agreement of the parties.

Any agreement to vary a contract is subject to general contract principles and needs to be supported by consideration. If an attempted contract

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Commercial News

FSA publishes new guidance mandating written allergen information for consumers

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has published updated industry guidance requiring food businesses in the out-of-home sector to provide written allergen information for non-prepacked foods. The guidance, which applies across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, follows the FSA board's December 2023 decision to strengthen allergen information requirements. The new framework mandates that written information about the 14 regulated allergens must be available alongside verbal communication between staff and customers, applying to both in-person and online sales. To facilitate implementation, the FSA has provided businesses with free resources including allergy icons, an allergen matrix, and downloadable materials for use on menus and websites. This development represents a significant shift in allergen management requirements for restaurants, cafes, market stalls, and takeaways.

ASA rulings—5 March 2025

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld two complaints against Gemporia Ltd regarding misleading price statements and comparisons in a teleshopping presentation for Tahitian pearl earrings. The ASA found the claims about resale value and comparisons with competitor products to be unsubstantiated and misleading.

Weekly roundup of HMRC import, export and customs guidance—3 March 2025

Details of updates to HMRC import, export and customs guidance for the period from 25 February to 3 March 2025.

Retention of title clauses, section 49(2) SGA 1979 and contractual estoppel in guarantee claims (CE Energy v Bashar & another)

Commercial analysis: This is an important decision as to a seller’s ability to claim in debt for the price of unpaid goods notwithstanding a retention of title provision in the contract of sale. The judgment contains a useful analysis as to the requirement, in section 49(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA 1979), for a price to be payable on ‘a day certain irrespective of delivery’, confirming that a wide interpretation should be adopted. The case also contains guidance as to construing guarantees and the operation and effect of the doctrine of contractual estoppel. Written by Nicola Allsop, barrister at Quadrant Chambers.