Ridgewood Properties Group Ltd & Ors v Valero Energy Ltd

Ridgewood Properties Group Ltd & Ors v Valero Energy Ltd

No term should be implied prohibiting Texaco from selling the sites; however, Texaco did put it out of its power to perform the airspace agreements by assigning the sites, but the claimants affirmed the agreements and cannot rely on repudiatory breach.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Ridgewood Properties Group Limited; Claimant: Ridgewood (Clerkenwell) Limited; Claimant: Ridgewood (Tottenham) Limited; Claimant: Golden Limited; Claimant: Hamlet Limited; Claimant: Redway Limited; Defendant: Valero Energy Limited; Part 20 Defendant: Pannone & Partners (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issue as to Liability Only
Outcome
Claim for repudiatory breach dismissed; claim for damages for non-repudiatory breach adjourned.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Repudiatory Breach, Assignment of Contracts, Landlord and Tenant (covenants) Act 1995, Limitation of Actions
Contract Law Property Law Implied Terms Repudiatory Breach Assignment of Contracts Landlord and Tenant (covenants) Act 1995 Limitation of Actions

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 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ridgewood Properties Group Limited

Claimant

Ridgewood (Clerkenwell) Limited

Claimant

Ridgewood (Tottenham) Limited

Claimant

Golden Limited

Claimant

Hamlet Limited

Claimant

Redway Limited

Claimant

Valero Energy Limited

Defendant

Pannone & Partners (A Firm)

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issue as to Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a term should be implied prohibiting Texaco from selling the sites before termination of the airspace agreements
  2. 2 Whether Texaco put it out of its power to perform the airspace agreements by assigning the sites
  3. 3 Whether the claimants affirmed the agreements and thus cannot rely on repudiatory breach

Ratio Decidendi

No term should be implied prohibiting Texaco from selling the sites; however, Texaco did put it out of its power to perform the airspace agreements by assigning the sites, but the claimants affirmed the agreements and cannot rely on repudiatory breach.

Court Disposition

Claim for repudiatory breach dismissed; claim for damages for non-repudiatory breach adjourned.

Orders

  • No term implied prohibiting sale by Texaco.
  • Texaco put it out of its power to perform by assigning the sites.