Stringfellow v Blyth [2001] EWCA Civ 1006 (18 June 2001)

Stringfellow v Blyth [2001] EWCA Civ 1006 (18 June 2001)

The trial judge erred in disregarding the agreed expert report and awarding damages for diminution in value for the kitchen extension; there was no actual diminution. The turning circle issue was resolved by a contract variation, so no breach occurred. The counterclaim was reduced accordingly, resulting in a net balance in favour of the claimant.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1006
Parties
Appellant: Dennis Stringfellow; Respondent: David Blyth
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From First Instance Judgment (technology & Construction Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for claimant for £1,243.50; counterclaim dismissed to that extent; costs of claim and counterclaim below awarded to claimant at 80%; costs of appeal to appellant.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages Assessment, Variation of Contract, Counterclaim, Costs
Contract Law Construction Law Breach of Contract Damages Assessment Variation of Contract Counterclaim 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dennis Stringfellow

Appellant

David Blyth

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From First Instance Judgment (technology & Construction Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in awarding damages for diminution in value regarding the kitchen extension
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in awarding damages for failure to provide a turning circle given the contract variation

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in disregarding the agreed expert report and awarding damages for diminution in value for the kitchen extension; there was no actual diminution. The turning circle issue was resolved by a contract variation, so no breach occurred. The counterclaim was reduced accordingly, resulting in a net balance in favour of the claimant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for claimant for £1,243.50; counterclaim dismissed to that extent; costs of claim and counterclaim below awarded to claimant at 80%; costs of appeal to appellant.

Orders

  • Set aside trial judge's order.
  • Enter judgment for claimant for £1,243.50.