McGill Construction Ltd. v. McKeon & Ors [2004] IEHC 88 (19 May 2004)

McGill Construction Ltd. v. McKeon & Ors [2004] IEHC 88 (19 May 2004)

There was no concluded agreement for the sale of the entire issued share capital in Whitefield Construction Limited as essential terms remained unresolved, both parties envisaged a formal written contract, and there was no intention to create legal relations at the relevant time. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's claims for breach of contract and breach of warranty of authority fail.

Citation
[2004] IEHC 88
Parties
Plaintiff: McGill Construction Ltd; Defendant: Paul McKeon; Defendant: Declan Hogan; Defendant: Patrick Brock; Defendant: Whitefield Construction Limited; Defendant: Patrick Brock & Son Limited trading as Brock Building Contractors; Defendant: Adrian Hegarty; Defendant: David Taylor; Defendant: Patrick O'Dowd
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Formation of Contract, Share Sale Agreements, Authority of Agents, Damages for Breach of Contract, Warranty of Authority
Contract Law Company Law Formation of Contract Share Sale Agreements Authority of Agents Damages for Breach of Contract Warranty of Authority

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

McGill Construction Ltd

Plaintiff

Paul McKeon

Defendant

Declan Hogan

Defendant

Patrick Brock

Defendant

Whitefield Construction Limited

Defendant

Patrick Brock & Son Limited trading as Brock Building Contractors

Defendant

Adrian Hegarty

Defendant

David Taylor

Defendant

Patrick O'Dowd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a concluded agreement for the purchase by the Plaintiff of the entire issued share capital in Whitefield Construction Limited
  2. 2 If so, entitlement to damages for breach of contract
  3. 3 If not, whether there was a breach of warranty of authority by Paul McKeon and entitlement to damages

Ratio Decidendi

There was no concluded agreement for the sale of the entire issued share capital in Whitefield Construction Limited as essential terms remained unresolved, both parties envisaged a formal written contract, and there was no intention to create legal relations at the relevant time. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's claims for breach of contract and breach of warranty of authority fail.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed