NUA Facades Ltd & Ors v Brady (t/a Terry Brady Developments Ltd)

NUA Facades Ltd & Ors v Brady (t/a Terry Brady Developments Ltd)

The Settlement Agreements and Silk Letters were not procured by bribery, conspiracy, dishonest assistance, duress, or undue influence. The Defendant was under commercial pressure but not illegitimate pressure. The agreements were entered into and ratified with actual authority, and are enforceable. The claims for...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Nua Facades Limited; Claimant: Nua Interiors Limited; Claimant: Silk Property Developments Limited; Defendant: Terry Brady t/a Terry Brady Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction/commercial) / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; Settlement Agreements and Silk Letters enforceable; Defendant liable for sums due under them.
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreements, Breach of Contract, Fiduciary Duties, Bribery and Corruption, Duress, Undue Influence, Dishonest Assistance
Contract Law Construction Law Commercial Law Settlement Agreements Breach of Contract Fiduciary Duties Bribery and Corruption Duress +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nua Facades Limited

Claimant

Nua Interiors Limited

Claimant

Silk Property Developments Limited

Claimant

Terry Brady t/a Terry Brady Developments Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction/commercial) / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Settlement Agreements and Silk Letters are enforceable or vitiated by bribery, conspiracy, dishonest assistance, duress, or undue influence; whether the sums claimed are due under the agreements or only the reasonable value of work done; whether the Defendant's defences of fraud, duress, undue influence, and lack of authority are made out.

Ratio Decidendi

The Settlement Agreements and Silk Letters were not procured by bribery, conspiracy, dishonest assistance, duress, or undue influence. The Defendant was under commercial pressure but not illegitimate pressure. The agreements were entered into and ratified with actual authority, and are enforceable. The claims for fraud and related defences are not made out on the evidence.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; Settlement Agreements and Silk Letters enforceable; Defendant liable for sums due under them.

Orders

  • Judgment for the Claimants for the sums due under the Settlement Agreements and Silk Letters, including loss of profit on the AGM2 contract (less credit for overlap).
  • Dismissal of all defences based on bribery, conspiracy, dishonest assistance, duress, and undue influence.