Redbourn Group Ltd v Fairgate Developments Ltd

Redbourn Group Ltd v Fairgate Developments Ltd

RGL is not entitled to damages for wrongful termination beyond the admitted sum because, on the facts, the project as envisaged was not viable or realistic, and FDL would have been entitled to lawfully terminate the contract before any further fees became due. There was no contractual obligation on FDL to proceed with the project or approve a planning application, and damages for loss of a chance are not available where the opportunity was not real or contractually protected.

Parties
Claimant: Redbourn Group Limited; Defendant: Fairgate Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract, Damages) / Judgment After Trial on Quantum
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; remainder dismissed
Legal Topics
Wrongful Termination, Damages, Loss of Chance, Remuneration Under Contract, Project Management Agreements
Contract Law Construction Law Wrongful Termination Damages Loss of Chance Remuneration Under Contract Project Management Agreements

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

Parties

Redbourn Group Limited

Claimant

Fairgate Developments Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract, Damages) / Judgment After Trial on Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to damages for wrongful termination of contract beyond admitted sums
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to damages for loss of a chance to earn further fees
  3. 3 Whether the defendant was contractually obliged to continue the project and employ the claimant for all stages

Ratio Decidendi

RGL is not entitled to damages for wrongful termination beyond the admitted sum because, on the facts, the project as envisaged was not viable or realistic, and FDL would have been entitled to lawfully terminate the contract before any further fees became due. There was no contractual obligation on FDL to proceed with the project or approve a planning application, and damages for loss of a chance are not available where the opportunity was not real or contractually protected.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; remainder dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant in the sum of £21,615 (plus VAT if applicable)
  • All other claims dismissed