Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd & Anor v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd

Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd & Anor v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd

Preliminaries should be valued in accordance with the payment programme and neutral cashflow procedure, allowing fixed items on a time elapsed basis and variable items on deliverables. Sumpter v Hedges remains binding, precluding restitutionary claims for work/materials after repudiation absent an implied contract. SV399 was a variation notice adjusting the contract sum, not a valuation of work completed to date. Retention monies should only be released as per the contract, and interest calculations should reflect actual entitlement dates.

Parties
Appellant: Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd; Appellant: Cleveland Bridge Dorman Long Engineering Ltd; Respondent: Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Quantum and Related Issues Following High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part and dismissed in part; orders varied accordingly.
Legal Topics
Subcontractor Payment, Repudiation of Contract, Restitution, Valuation of Works, Retention Monies, Variation Orders
Construction Law Contract Law Subcontractor Payment Repudiation of Contract Restitution Valuation of Works Retention Monies Variation Orders

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd

Appellant

Cleveland Bridge Dorman Long Engineering Ltd

Appellant

Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Quantum and Related Issues Following High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper method for valuing preliminaries under the subcontract and supplemental agreement
  2. 2 Entitlement to restitutionary payment for work and materials supplied after repudiation
  3. 3 Interpretation and effect of variation notice SV399

Ratio Decidendi

Preliminaries should be valued in accordance with the payment programme and neutral cashflow procedure, allowing fixed items on a time elapsed basis and variable items on deliverables. Sumpter v Hedges remains binding, precluding restitutionary claims for work/materials after repudiation absent an implied contract. SV399 was a variation notice adjusting the contract sum, not a valuation of work completed to date. Retention monies should only be released as per the contract, and interest calculations should reflect actual entitlement dates.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part and dismissed in part; orders varied accordingly.

Orders

  • Cleveland Bridge's appeal on valuation of preliminaries allowed; valuation to follow payment programme and neutral cashflow procedure.
  • Cleveland Bridge's appeals on restitutionary claims and fabricated steel dismissed.