Emcor Drake and Scull Ltd. v Sir Robert McaLpine Ltd.

Emcor Drake and Scull Ltd. v Sir Robert McaLpine Ltd.

No binding contract existed obliging EDS to carry out the whole of the M & E works; EDS was only obliged to carry out works up to the value of £14 million under the issued orders. The letter of 20th August 2001 did not constitute an enforceable contract for the whole works, as important terms remained to be negotiated and no formal sub-contract was executed.

Parties
Claimant: Emcor Drake and Scull Limited; Defendant: Sir Robert McAlpine Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Claimant not under obligation to complete whole works; preliminary issues decided against respondent's primary case.
Legal Topics
Formation of Contract, Repudiatory Breach, Payment Terms, Estoppel, Private Finance Initiative (pfi) Contracts
Contract Law Construction Law Formation of Contract Repudiatory Breach Payment Terms Estoppel Private Finance Initiative (pfi) Contracts

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emcor Drake and Scull Limited

Claimant

Sir Robert McAlpine Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was under an obligation to complete the whole of the mechanical and electrical works for the Dudley Hospitals PFI project
  2. 2 Whether a binding contract for the whole works existed
  3. 3 Whether the withholding notice was necessary and effective

Ratio Decidendi

No binding contract existed obliging EDS to carry out the whole of the M & E works; EDS was only obliged to carry out works up to the value of £14 million under the issued orders. The letter of 20th August 2001 did not constitute an enforceable contract for the whole works, as important terms remained to be negotiated and no formal sub-contract was executed.

Court Disposition

Claimant not under obligation to complete whole works; preliminary issues decided against respondent's primary case.

Orders

  • Claimant obliged to carry out design, procurement and site works for M & E works limited to £14 million.
  • Implied terms that work be carried out in a good and workmanlike manner.