Act Construction Ltd v E Clarke & Son [2002] EWCA Civ 1341 (16 July 2002)

Act Construction Ltd v E Clarke & Son [2002] EWCA Civ 1341 (16 July 2002)

The Court of Appeal found that a contract existed between the parties, not the contract pleaded but a contract to perform work for reward. The issue of defective workmanship was not resolved due to insufficient information and was remitted to the trial judge. The appellant was awarded two-thirds of the costs of the appeal, with no order on the cross-appeal.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1341
Parties
Claimant/respondent: ACT Construction Limited; Defendant/appellant: E Clarke & Son
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (technology and Construction Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; matter remitted to trial judge for determination of defective workmanship claim; costs orders made.
Legal Topics
Existence of Contract, Implied Terms, Defective Workmanship, Costs Orders
Contract Law Construction Law Existence of Contract Implied Terms Defective Workmanship Costs Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ACT Construction Limited

Claimant/respondent

E Clarke & Son

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (technology and Construction Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contract existed between the parties
  2. 2 Whether there were implied terms for good workmanship
  3. 3 Whether the claim for defective workmanship remains outstanding

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that a contract existed between the parties, not the contract pleaded but a contract to perform work for reward. The issue of defective workmanship was not resolved due to insufficient information and was remitted to the trial judge. The appellant was awarded two-thirds of the costs of the appeal, with no order on the cross-appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; matter remitted to trial judge for determination of defective workmanship claim; costs orders made.

Orders

  • Mark-up on invoices to be adjusted from 8% or nothing to 15%, subject to agreement or further hearing.
  • Claim for defective workmanship remitted to His Honour Judge Thornton QC for determination.