Perriam Ltd v Wayne & Anor

Perriam Ltd v Wayne & Anor

Clause 4.2 of the Deed of Variation operated as an immediate waiver and release of the tenant's and guarantors' liability for the condition of the windows from the date of the Deed (24 April 2007), providing a complete defence to the dilapidations claim in respect of the windows. The absence of a saving for antecedent breach and the commercial context supported this interpretation. The costs of the preliminary issues should be costs in the case, and the security for costs should be returned to court.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Perriam Limited; Defendant/appellant: Mr Nicholas Wayne; Defendant/appellant: Mr Martin Daly
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Preliminary Issues and Costs Orders
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Deeds, Guarantor Liability, Repairing Covenants, Waiver and Release, 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Perriam Limited

Claimant/respondent

Mr Nicholas Wayne

Defendant/appellant

Mr Martin Daly

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Preliminary Issues and Costs Orders

  1. 1 Whether clause 4.2 of the Deed of Variation operated as an immediate waiver or release of liability for the condition of the windows
  2. 2 Whether the appellants, as guarantors, had a continuing liability for dilapidations relating to the windows after the Deed of Variation
  3. 3 Whether the costs of the preliminary issues should be awarded to the claimant or be costs in the case

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 4.2 of the Deed of Variation operated as an immediate waiver and release of the tenant's and guarantors' liability for the condition of the windows from the date of the Deed (24 April 2007), providing a complete defence to the dilapidations claim in respect of the windows. The absence of a saving for antecedent breach and the commercial context supported this interpretation. The costs of the preliminary issues should be costs in the case, and the security for costs should be returned to court.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appellants have a complete defence to the dilapidations claim in respect of the windows
  • Costs of the preliminary issues to be costs in the case