Delroy Chandler v Downsound Records Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Jamaica |
| Judge | Thomas, J. |
| Judgment Date | 26 September 2019 |
| Court | Supreme Court (Jamaica) |
| Docket Number | CLAIM NO. 2009 HCV 4827 |
| Date | 26 September 2019 |
[2019] JMSC Civ 217
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF JAMAICA
CLAIM NO. 2009 HCV 4827
Mr. Adrian Christie instructed by Williams, Young, Parker for the Claimants.
Chad Lawrence instructed by Samuda and Johnson for the Defendant.
Breach of Management Contract between Artiste/Dub Poet and Recording Company — Interpretation of contractual terms — Whether time was of the essence — Option to renew — Whether the option was exercised — Repudiation of contract — Whether the Claimant waived his right to terminate — Anticipatory Breach — Whether intention to breach established — Damages — Damage to reputation or loss of opportunity — Whether damages proven — Whether the award should be substantial or nominal — Whether the Defendant is entitled to a set off.
The Claimant Mr. Delroy Chandler (A.K.A DYCR) a professional Dub Poet has brought this claim against thE Defendant Company, Down Sound Records (DSR) for damages for breach of management contract. It is the claim of Mr. Chandler that prior to contracting with DSR he had an active and successful career as he was in high demand to produce dub-plates and jingles, being paid between $20,000.00 and $40,000.00 Jamaican, per dub-plate from around the year 2000. He further alleges that his contractual relationship with the Defendant led to a down turn in his career and a loss of reputation as a result of the Defendant failing to comply with the terms of the contract.
However the defence is that the Defendant Company has fulfilled its obligation under the contract and that it is the Claimant who is in breach of the contract. Additionally, in defence of the Company Mr. Josef Bogdanovich Chief executive officer, and Managing Director of the Defendant company asserts that in any event whatever payment the Claimant would be entitled to under the contract would have been exhausted by way of a set-off against the Defendant's expenditure in promoting his career under the contract.
A summary of the facts as it relates to liability for breach of contract are as follows:
The parties entered into a management contract on the 12 th August, 2004 whereby the Defendant Company, Down Sound Records (DSR) agreed to exclusively manage the career of the Claimant (DYCR) for the contractual period, which appears to be for 1 year in the first instance with an option to renew for three years. In return, the Claimant was to record tracks and attend shows booked for him by the Defendant. The contract also included terms for the Defendant to produce videos and one album, with an option to produce three additional albums within a three-year period. The Claimant terminated the contract with the Defendant Company in July 2008.
The Claimant contends that:
He began working on the album that consists of several tracks as was agreed under the contract, within a few months from signing the contract. He completed recording all tracks for the album before the scheduled date. Within twelve months after signing and during the life of the contract his career began to decline and lacked its previous successes. As a result, he threatened to leave the company and was asked not to leave and was given the assurance that his album would be produced and promoted as agreed. In and around August 2005, with the knowledge and authorization of the Defendant, he entered into a Recording Agreement with TAD's International Limited and TAD's Inc. TAD's paid DSR Five Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($550,000.00) for the purpose of producing two (2) music videos for him. DSR only produced one of those music videos. The failure of DSR to make the necessary provisions to facilitate the production of the two music videos indicated a breach by DSR of the contract with him that required DSR to Produce music “videos” for him. This, he asserts was a further failure by DSR to promote his music career. It also caused a breach of contract between himself and TAD's. Furthermore, the fact that TAD's paid DSR for two music videos, one of which was never produced, caused a deterioration in the business relationship with himself and TAD's. It also created further loss in his earnings as TAD's recouped from his royalties that full amount of Five Hundred and Fifty Thousand Jamaican Dollars ($550,000.00 JA).
Her further alleges that his cultural appeal and reputation as a Rastafarian dub poet was further tarnished when, under the direction of DSR, who had the obligation of promoting him, released a poster of him in which he was sprayed in gold. He contends that the poster received such negative reviews that DS R was forced to redo the poster.
At the end of the first year of the Contract, he again indicated his dissatisfaction with DSR and his intention to terminate the Contract. DSR continued to assure him that they would make amends and perform their obligations under the contract. Thereafter, DSR repeatedly gave him such assurances, but they never did deliver on their promises. In 2008, he sought to terminate the contract and DSR tried to convince him to stay in the arrangement by undertaking to perform its obligations under the Contract.
He testifies that as an entertainer it is vital to his continued success to have music produced and distributed, and played publicly to maintain his visibility in the music industry and in the eyes of the public. DSR's failure to release the album stifled the momentum he had generated prior to signing of the contract.
However Mr. Bogdanovich contends that:
The Defendant successfully carried out the tenets of the contract with the Claimant by providing him with opportunities to perform at stage shows, producing videos, the recordings of an album and promoting him throughout the Caribbean and on international music radio stations. He was booked to perform at shows in the Cayman Islands, Caribbean Music Festival in New York, the Sons and Daughters Show, Sting and East Fest just to name a few examples
His single “Misunderstandings”, which is arguably one of his better works, was recorded by the Defendant and the music video for the song was also done by the Defendant. Another music video titled “Barber Chair” was recorded in collaboration with TAD's International Limited and the Claimant; with the consent of the Defendant contracted with TAD's International Limited for them to record, promote and distribute the album. The album was sufficiently promoted electronically, visually and in the printed media.
The funds for both videos were sent to the Defendant by TAD's International Limited; however, the amount contracted for was insufficient to produce two videos of quality and commercial viability with the result that the parties to the contract took the decision to use the funds to create one good music video. In order to promote the album in an effective manner for the benefit of all parties, the Defendant brought in popular entertainers to perform on the video for “Barber Chair”. The Defendant provided opportunities for the Claimant, throughout the Caribbean United States and the United Kingdom. The Defendant provided the Claimant with work on stage shows, some engagements that were sufficient to place the Claimant in the mainstream industry but he could not survive as the audience and the populous did not respond favourably. Event promoters who were clients and associates of the Defendant started requesting less of the Claimant. In view of his failed market appeal and the dismal record sales it became clear to the Claimant and the Defendant that the Claimant was a failed artiste but the Claimant prevailed upon the Defendant to continue to fund his album to which the Defendant consented.
The Claimant expressed disappointment to the Defendant that he wasn't gaining traction. He declined to consistently record tracks and to attend shows that were booked for him, indicating that he did not like the shows. The Claimant was reprimanded and encouraged to make greater effort in advancing his career and to complete the recording of an album which at the time only had eight (8) recorded songs. The contents of the songs were not marketable. Nevertheless, the Defendant produced an album. An external survey was done by the Defendant which indicated that it would not be commercially viable.
The Defendant made an executive decision not to release the album. In or around July 2008 and after several discussions, the Claimant agreed to ensure that he complied enough recordings of the Defendant's standard for the future release of an album. In consideration of that oral agreement, the Defendant made an offer to give the Claimant an advance payment of Five Thousand United States Dollars (US$5000) for an album with an additional Five Thousand United States Dollars (US$5000) on completion. The Claimant failed to complete the album as he was contracted to do and thereafter terminated the contract.
Mr. Bogdanovitch further alleges that the Claimant was unable to abide by the guidelines of the Defendant in his overall general conduct and the management of his career. Despite years of best efforts of the Defendant and investments, the genre was not commercially viable as the public did not respond well to the music that was put out and the Claimant himself did not have sufficient appeal to compensate. He denies that the Defendant owes the Claimant any sum at all, and in the unlikely event it is otherwise found, then there must be a set off of the amount owed by the Claimant to the Defendant amounting to approximately US$90,000.00., for cost and expenses incurred by the Defendant on the Claimant's behalf, which set off would extinguish any monies allegedly due to him
In all matters involving breach of...
To continue reading
Request your trial