Shyam Jewellers Ltd v Cheeseman [2001] EWCA Civ 1818 (29 November 2001)

Shyam Jewellers Ltd v Cheeseman [2001] EWCA Civ 1818 (29 November 2001)

The claimant's failure to make an immediate substantial interim payment did not, in the circumstances, amount to a repudiatory breach. The defendant was not entitled to treat the contract as at an end without making a clear demand for a specific sum and allowing time for payment. The defendant's letter of 19 February 1999 constituted a repudiatory breach, and the claimant is entitled to judgment on liability with damages to be assessed.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1818
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Shyam Jewellers Limited; Defendant/respondent: M. Cheeseman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (technology and Construction Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for claimant on liability; damages to be assessed.
Legal Topics
Repudiatory Breach, Interim Payments, Summary Judgment, Contractual Obligations, Variation of Contract, Damages Assessment
Contract Law Construction Law Repudiatory Breach Interim Payments Summary Judgment Contractual Obligations Variation of Contract Damages Assessment

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shyam Jewellers Limited

Claimant/appellant

M. Cheeseman

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's failure to make an immediate substantial interim payment constituted a repudiatory breach of contract justifying termination by the defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's letter of 19 February 1999 itself constituted a repudiatory breach.

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's failure to make an immediate substantial interim payment did not, in the circumstances, amount to a repudiatory breach. The defendant was not entitled to treat the contract as at an end without making a clear demand for a specific sum and allowing time for payment. The defendant's letter of 19 February 1999 constituted a repudiatory breach, and the claimant is entitled to judgment on liability with damages to be assessed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for claimant on liability; damages to be assessed.

Orders

  • Judgment in favour of the defendant set aside.
  • Judgment entered for the claimant for damages to be assessed by a judge other than Judge Thornton QC.