Gateway Plaza Ltd v White & Anor [2015] EW Misc B2 (CC) (28 January 2015)

Gateway Plaza Ltd v White & Anor [2015] EW Misc B2 (CC) (28 January 2015)

Gateway's breach of the implied term in the settlement agreement (failure to provide the CML form) prevented Mr White from exchanging contracts for plot 2. A term is to be implied into the settlement agreement that Gateway cannot pursue its original claim for damages regarding plot 159 if its own breach prevented performance. Damages are to be assessed as the difference between the market value of plot 2 as at March 2012 and the price Mr White would have paid, with interest from March 2012.

Citation
[2015] EW Misc B2 (CC)
Parties
Claimant: Gateway Plaza Ltd; Defendant: Mr White; Second Defendant: Mr Peace (deceased, by personal representative)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Remedies Hearing Following Appellate Decision and Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Gateway is not permitted to pursue its claim for damages for Mr White's alleged breach of contract in respect of plot 159. Damages to Mr White are to be assessed, with a further hearing required to determine the value of plot 2 and costs.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Breach of Contract, Remedies for Breach, Accord and Satisfaction, Damages Assessment, Settlement Agreements
Contract Law Property Law Implied Terms Breach of Contract Remedies for Breach Accord and Satisfaction Damages Assessment Settlement 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gateway Plaza Ltd

Claimant

Mr White

Defendant

Mr Peace (deceased, by personal representative)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Remedies Hearing Following Appellate Decision and Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Gateway's breach of the settlement agreement prevents it from pursuing its original claim for damages regarding plot 159
  2. 2 Whether Mr White is entitled to damages for Gateway's breach and the proper measure of such damages

Ratio Decidendi

Gateway's breach of the implied term in the settlement agreement (failure to provide the CML form) prevented Mr White from exchanging contracts for plot 2. A term is to be implied into the settlement agreement that Gateway cannot pursue its original claim for damages regarding plot 159 if its own breach prevented performance. Damages are to be assessed as the difference between the market value of plot 2 as at March 2012 and the price Mr White would have paid, with interest from March 2012.

Court Disposition

Gateway is not permitted to pursue its claim for damages for Mr White's alleged breach of contract in respect of plot 159. Damages to Mr White are to be assessed, with a further hearing required to determine the value of plot 2 and costs.

Orders

  • Gateway's claim for damages regarding plot 159 is dismissed.
  • Damages to Mr White to be assessed based on the difference between the market value of plot 2 as at March 2012 and the price payable, with interest.