PM Project Services Ltd v Dairy Crest Ltd

PM Project Services Ltd v Dairy Crest Ltd

There was no binding variation of the DOV as to the timing of the balloon payment due to lack of agreement on essential terms and consideration. However, there is a real prospect that Dairy Crest may establish promissory estoppel or that it would be inequitable to allow PM to enforce the payment at this stage, particularly given unresolved factual issues and a substantial counterclaim. Summary judgment is therefore inappropriate.

Parties
Claimant: PM Project Services Limited; Defendant: Dairy Crest Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/construction) / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed as regards the balloon payment; permission to defend granted; second and third limbs of application adjourned.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Variation of Contract, Promissory Estoppel, Consideration, Repudiation, Professional Negligence
Contract Law Commercial Law Construction Law Summary Judgment Variation of Contract Promissory Estoppel Consideration Repudiation +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PM Project Services Limited

Claimant

Dairy Crest Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/construction) / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a binding variation of the Deed of Variation (DOV) regarding the timing of the balloon payment invoice
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is estopped from enforcing the balloon payment due to representations made
  3. 3 Whether there is a triable issue as to completion of works triggering payment

Ratio Decidendi

There was no binding variation of the DOV as to the timing of the balloon payment due to lack of agreement on essential terms and consideration. However, there is a real prospect that Dairy Crest may establish promissory estoppel or that it would be inequitable to allow PM to enforce the payment at this stage, particularly given unresolved factual issues and a substantial counterclaim. Summary judgment is therefore inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed as regards the balloon payment; permission to defend granted; second and third limbs of application adjourned.

Orders

  • PM’s application for summary judgment on the balloon payment is dismissed.
  • Permission to defend is granted to Dairy Crest on that issue.