Harrow Green Ltd v DDG Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 421 (QB) (04 March 2010)

Harrow Green Ltd v DDG Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 421 (QB) (04 March 2010)

The contract between HG and DDG was for HG to carry out relocation work as instructed by DDG for a reasonable sum to be ascertained after completion, with interim payments on account. There was no agreement to limit HG's entitlement to the sum of £170,326, nor was the contract compromised or varied on 13 February 2008. DDG remains liable to pay HG the reasonable cost of its work, less sums already paid, after DDG has had a reasonable opportunity to recover compensation from the LDA.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 421 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Harrow Green Limited; Defendant: DDG Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Trial of Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant by way of declarations on both preliminary issues.
Legal Topics
Formation of Contract, Terms of Contract, Implied Terms, Compromise and Variation, Statutory Compensation, Relocation Costs
Contract Law Compulsory Purchase Compensation Formation of Contract Terms of Contract Implied Terms Compromise and Variation Statutory Compensation Relocation Costs

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harrow Green Limited

Claimant

DDG Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Trial of Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What were the terms of the contract between Harrow Green Limited and DDG Group Limited?
  2. 2 Was the contract compromised or varied on 13 February 2008 as alleged by the defendant?

Ratio Decidendi

The contract between HG and DDG was for HG to carry out relocation work as instructed by DDG for a reasonable sum to be ascertained after completion, with interim payments on account. There was no agreement to limit HG's entitlement to the sum of £170,326, nor was the contract compromised or varied on 13 February 2008. DDG remains liable to pay HG the reasonable cost of its work, less sums already paid, after DDG has had a reasonable opportunity to recover compensation from the LDA.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant by way of declarations on both preliminary issues.

Orders

  • Declaration as to the nature of the contract: HG to carry out relocation work for a reasonable sum to be ascertained after completion, with interim payments on account.
  • Declaration that there was no compromise or variation of the contract on 13 February 2008.