Wild Duck Ltd v Smith & Ors

Wild Duck Ltd v Smith & Ors

The lessors were entitled to invoke the proviso to clause 7 of the leases and undertake the Outstanding Works themselves because the Management Company had failed to perform its obligations; therefore, the lessors' actions did not constitute prevention of performance and there was no breach of the implied term.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Wild Duck Limited; Respondent/defendant: Dean Smith; Respondent/defendant: Lucy Smith; Respondent/defendant: Leanne Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Landlord and Tenant, Implied Terms, Prevention of Performance, Management Company Obligations
Land Law Contract Law Landlord and Tenant Implied Terms Prevention of Performance Management Company Obligations

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wild Duck Limited

Appellant/claimant

Dean Smith

Respondent/defendant

Lucy Smith

Respondent/defendant

Leanne Smith

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lessors prevented the Management Company from performing its obligations under the leases to complete the Outstanding Works
  2. 2 Whether the lessors were entitled to step in and undertake the Outstanding Works under the proviso to clause 7 of the leases
  3. 3 Whether the Management Company was in fact prevented from performing its obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The lessors were entitled to invoke the proviso to clause 7 of the leases and undertake the Outstanding Works themselves because the Management Company had failed to perform its obligations; therefore, the lessors' actions did not constitute prevention of performance and there was no breach of the implied term.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed