Bond v Dunster Properties Ltd & Ors

Bond v Dunster Properties Ltd & Ors

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that Mr Bond Senior had signed the AC PPA or, in any event, had conducted himself as if bound by it. The 22-month delay in judgment delivery, while lamentable, did not render the findings unsafe or justify a retrial. The judge's assessment of the evidence and witnesses was not shown to be plainly wrong or materially affected by the delay.

Parties
Appellant: Grahame Henry Bond; Respondent: Dunster Properties Limited; Respondent: Dunster Holdings Limited; Respondent: Grahame Miles James Bond
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division, Mercantile Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Delay in Judgment, Findings of Fact, Partnership Agreements, Rectification of Contract, Appeals on Fact, Preliminary Issues, Communication of Acceptance
Contract Law Civil Procedure Delay in Judgment Findings of Fact Partnership Agreements Rectification of Contract Appeals on Fact Preliminary Issues +1 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grahame Henry Bond

Appellant

Dunster Properties Limited

Respondent

Dunster Holdings Limited

Respondent

Grahame Miles James Bond

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division, Mercantile Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's findings of fact should be set aside due to a 22-month delay in judgment delivery
  2. 2 Whether Mr Bond Senior signed or otherwise agreed to be bound by the Admiral Court Project Partnership Agreement (AC PPA)
  3. 3 Whether the AC PPA or an alternative arrangement governed the parties' relationship regarding Admiral Court

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that Mr Bond Senior had signed the AC PPA or, in any event, had conducted himself as if bound by it. The 22-month delay in judgment delivery, while lamentable, did not render the findings unsafe or justify a retrial. The judge's assessment of the evidence and witnesses was not shown to be plainly wrong or materially affected by the delay.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; judgment of the High Court (Mercantile Court) upheld.