Concrete Foundations Ltd. v Family Housing Association [2004] EWHC 10 (QB) (14 January 2004)
The evidence available does not establish that FHA is liable for more than its apportioned share or that Cunningham Lindsay had authority to bind FHA for the full sum; factual disputes require trial and summary judgment is inappropriate.
- Citation
- [2004] EWHC 10
- Parties
- Claimant/appellant: Concrete Foundations Limited; Defendant/respondent: Family Housing Association
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 14 January 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Summary Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Ostensible Authority, Actual Authority, Unjust Enrichment, Agency, Apportionment of Liability
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Concrete Foundations Limited
Claimant/appellant
Family Housing Association
Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Summary Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether summary judgment should be granted to the claimant for the unpaid contract sum
- 2 Whether Cunningham Lindsay had actual or ostensible authority to bind FHA for the full contract sum
- 3 Whether FHA is liable for the full contract sum or only its apportioned share
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence available does not establish that FHA is liable for more than its apportioned share or that Cunningham Lindsay had authority to bind FHA for the full sum; factual disputes require trial and summary judgment is inappropriate.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed; summary judgment refused; matter to proceed to trial if pursued further.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment