Clark & Anor v Thorpe & Anor

Clark & Anor v Thorpe & Anor

The fresh evidence of the subcontractor’s invoice demonstrates that the AMF invoice was excessive, and would likely have influenced the judge’s assessment of quantum; justice requires damages to be reassessed by a different judge.

Parties
Appellant: Clark & Anr; Respondent: Thorpe & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Damages Assessment, Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Contract Tort Misrepresentation Damages Assessment Fresh Evidence on Appeal

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clark & Anr

Appellant

Thorpe & Anr

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cost of remedial works claimed by the claimants was excessive
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted on appeal
  3. 3 Impact of excessive invoicing on quantum of damages

Ratio Decidendi

The fresh evidence of the subcontractor’s invoice demonstrates that the AMF invoice was excessive, and would likely have influenced the judge’s assessment of quantum; justice requires damages to be reassessed by a different judge.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Judge’s decision as to quantum set aside
  • Decision on liability stands