Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Ltd. v Vago

Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Ltd. v Vago

Summary judgment is granted because the defendant's set-off and counterclaim are too vague and unsubstantiated to amount to a real prospect of defence. A stay of execution is refused because the claimant is not insolvent, its financial position is similar to that at the time of contract, and any financial difficulties are attributable in significant part to the defendant's non-payment.

Parties
Claimant: Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Limited; Defendant: Derek Vago
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application and Application for Stay of Execution
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the claimant; application for stay of execution refused.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Stay of Execution, Summary Judgment, Financial Position of Claimant, Set Off and Counterclaim
Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Stay of Execution Summary Judgment Financial Position of Claimant Set Off and Counterclaim

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Limited

Claimant

Derek Vago

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application and Application for Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment should be granted for the sum awarded by the adjudicator and for post-contract works
  2. 2 Whether a stay of execution should be granted due to the claimant's financial position
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's set-off and counterclaim constitute a real prospect of defence

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment is granted because the defendant's set-off and counterclaim are too vague and unsubstantiated to amount to a real prospect of defence. A stay of execution is refused because the claimant is not insolvent, its financial position is similar to that at the time of contract, and any financial difficulties are attributable in significant part to the defendant's non-payment.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the claimant; application for stay of execution refused.

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the claimant in the sum of £129,431.31 inclusive of VAT.
  • Interest payable on the judgment sum (to be agreed by the parties).