Smales v Lea & Anor

Smales v Lea & Anor

The contract was not an entire contract; the claimant's entitlement to fees arose at the latest in 1999 after completion of remedial works, and limitation began to run then. Ongoing negotiations with insurers did not postpone accrual of the cause of action. The claim was statute barred.

Parties
Appellant: Robert Smales; Respondent: Martin Lea; Respondent: Alison Kemsley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment on Preliminary Issue (limitation)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Entire Contract Doctrine, Limitation of Actions, Professional Fees, Construction of Contract
Contract Law Civil Procedure Entire Contract Doctrine Limitation of Actions Professional Fees Construction 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Smales

Appellant

Martin Lea

Respondent

Alison Kemsley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment on Preliminary Issue (limitation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract between the claimant and Mr Bartram was an entire contract
  2. 2 When the claimant's cause of action for professional fees accrued for limitation purposes
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was entitled to sue for his fees before negotiations with insurers concluded or broke down

Ratio Decidendi

The contract was not an entire contract; the claimant's entitlement to fees arose at the latest in 1999 after completion of remedial works, and limitation began to run then. Ongoing negotiations with insurers did not postpone accrual of the cause of action. The claim was statute barred.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Claimant to pay costs of the action