Sir David Alliance v Regent Holdings Incorporated [1999] EWCA Civ 1953 (23 July 1999)

Sir David Alliance v Regent Holdings Incorporated [1999] EWCA Civ 1953 (23 July 1999)

No manifest error was demonstrated on the face of Mr Margo's valuation, as the method of calculation was not fully set out and the language did not preclude the method used to reach the final figure. The valuation was final and binding under the contract and consent order, and the court would not intervene.

Citation
[1999] EWCA Civ 1953
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Sir David Alliance; Defendant/appellant: Regent Holdings Incorporated
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (decision of Park J, 9 September 1998)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Determination, Finality of Expert Valuation, Manifest Error, Specific Performance, Variation of Contract
Contract Law Property Law Expert Determination Finality of Expert Valuation Manifest Error Specific Performance Variation of Contract

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

Parties

Sir David Alliance

Claimant/respondent

Regent Holdings Incorporated

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (decision of Park J, 9 September 1998)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the expert valuer (Mr Margo) made a manifest arithmetical error in his valuation of Mermaid House
  2. 2 Whether any such error was material to the valuation
  3. 3 Whether the expert's valuation was final and binding on the parties under the contract and consent order

Ratio Decidendi

No manifest error was demonstrated on the face of Mr Margo's valuation, as the method of calculation was not fully set out and the language did not preclude the method used to reach the final figure. The valuation was final and binding under the contract and consent order, and the court would not intervene.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.