William Clark Partnership Ltd v Dock St PCT Ltd [2015] EWHC 2923 (TCC) (16 October 2015)

William Clark Partnership Ltd v Dock St PCT Ltd [2015] EWHC 2923 (TCC) (16 October 2015)

Clark was entitled to the balance of its professional fees under the deed of appointment, subject to deductions for certain breaches. Dock Street failed to prove its claims for damages in relation to pre-construction and construction phases except for unnecessary variations and certain post-construction phase losses. The court found Dock Street entitled to damages for unnecessary variations (£52,023.46) and post-construction phase (£37,500), and a deduction for construction phase services (£25,000 plus VAT). After set-off, Clark was entitled to a net sum of £42,976.54.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 2923 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: William Clark Partnership Limited; Defendant: Dock St PCT Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Partially in favour of Claimant, with set-off for Defendant's counterclaims.
Legal Topics
Professional Fees, Breach of Contract, Abatement, Damages, Project Management Services, Quantity Surveying, Variation Claims, Set Off
Construction Law Contract Law Professional Negligence Professional Fees Breach of Contract Abatement Damages Project Management Services +3 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Clark Partnership Limited

Claimant

Dock St PCT Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Clark was entitled to the balance of professional fees under the deed of appointment
  2. 2 Whether Dock Street was entitled to damages for breach of contract and/or professional negligence
  3. 3 Whether Dock Street was entitled to repayment or abatement of sums paid to Clark

Ratio Decidendi

Clark was entitled to the balance of its professional fees under the deed of appointment, subject to deductions for certain breaches. Dock Street failed to prove its claims for damages in relation to pre-construction and construction phases except for unnecessary variations and certain post-construction phase losses. The court found Dock Street entitled to damages for unnecessary variations (£52,023.46) and post-construction phase (£37,500), and a deduction for construction phase services (£25,000 plus VAT). After set-off, Clark was entitled to a net sum of £42,976.54.

Court Disposition

Partially in favour of Claimant, with set-off for Defendant's counterclaims.

Orders

  • Clark entitled to recover principal sum of £132,500.
  • Dock Street entitled to damages of £89,523.46.