Quest Advisors Limited Sharriba Ltd v McFeely & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 1517 (09 December 2011)

Quest Advisors Limited Sharriba Ltd v McFeely & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 1517 (09 December 2011)

The order of 22 October 2009 did not remove Quest's obligation to make stage payments under the contract. Quest's failure to pay did not amount to repudiation because it was based on a genuine, albeit mistaken, belief about the effect of the order. The court had no jurisdiction to order the interim payment of £600,000 without proper application and evidence; the sum should be reduced to £136,396.46 plus VAT, reflecting the likely amount due based on available evidence.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 1517
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Quest Advisors Limited; Claimant/appellant: Sharriba Limited; Defendant/respondent: Thomas Bernard McFeely; Defendant/respondent: Conal Derek McFeely
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Repudiation of Contract, Interim Payments, Construction of Court Orders, Stage Payments in Property Development, Assignment of Contractual Rights
Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Specific Performance Repudiation of Contract Interim Payments Construction of Court Orders Stage Payments in Property Development +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Quest Advisors Limited

Claimant/appellant

Sharriba Limited

Claimant/appellant

Thomas Bernard McFeely

Defendant/respondent

Conal Derek McFeely

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order of 22 October 2009 removed Quest's obligation to make stage payments under the contract
  2. 2 Whether Quest's failure to make stage payments constituted repudiation of the contract
  3. 3 Whether the court had jurisdiction to order an interim payment of £600,000

Ratio Decidendi

The order of 22 October 2009 did not remove Quest's obligation to make stage payments under the contract. Quest's failure to pay did not amount to repudiation because it was based on a genuine, albeit mistaken, belief about the effect of the order. The court had no jurisdiction to order the interim payment of £600,000 without proper application and evidence; the sum should be reduced to £136,396.46 plus VAT, reflecting the likely amount due based on available evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Paragraph 3 of the order of 1 March 2010 varied: Quest to pay £136,396.46 plus VAT to the defendants within 28 days.
  • Defendants' appeals on repudiation dismissed.