header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
24 May 2007
Issue: 7274 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Reasonably onerous

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Helen Hart and Nicola Rüütel examine how the phrase “reasonable endeavours” has been interpreted

Reasonable endeavours: one of contract lawyers’ favourite phrases. It will often be used where the parties cannot or do not want to agree a specific obligation and to finalise and sign the contract as quickly as possible. Yet it should not be used lightly. Where any expression is used in a contract it must be read and interpreted in the context of the obligations and circumstances in question, but sometimes the expression will be given a specific meaning by the courts.

There have been various cases considering the use of the phrases “reasonable endeavours” and “best endeavours” culminating in Rhodia International Holdings Ltd v Huntsman International LLC [2007] EWHC 292 (Comm), [2007] All ER (D) 264 (Feb) and Yewbelle Ltd v London Green Developments Ltd & Knightsbridge Green Ltd [2006] EWHC 3166 (Ch), [2006] All ER (D) 122 (Dec).

BEST v REASONABLE

An obligation to use best endeavours generally requires the person giving the undertaking to take those steps which a prudent and determined man acting in his own interests and anxious to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll