Hamon v Webster [2002] JRC 138 (19 July 2002)

Hamon v Webster [2002] JRC 138 (19 July 2002)

The agreement between the parties was as set out in the written document dated 17 July 1999, as varied by subsequent correspondence. The Plaintiff failed to complete the works by the final agreed date (15 January 2001), a term which was made of the essence by express agreement. The Defendant was therefore entitled to terminate the contract, engage an alternative contractor, and claim damages. The Plaintiff's claim fails.

Citation
[2002] JRC 138
Parties
Plaintiff: Mr Hamon; Defendant: Mr Webster
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
19 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; Defendant's counter-claim succeeds in part
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Breach of Contract, Variation of Contract, Termination of Contract, Damages, Counter Claim
Contract Law Property Law Specific Performance Breach of Contract Variation of Contract Termination of Contract Damages Counter Claim

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Hamon

Plaintiff

Mr Webster

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written agreement of 17 July 1999 reflected the true agreement between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff was entitled to specific performance or damages for breach of contract
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant was entitled to terminate the contract and claim damages for completion and lost rental

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement between the parties was as set out in the written document dated 17 July 1999, as varied by subsequent correspondence. The Plaintiff failed to complete the works by the final agreed date (15 January 2001), a term which was made of the essence by express agreement. The Defendant was therefore entitled to terminate the contract, engage an alternative contractor, and claim damages. The Plaintiff's claim fails.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed; Defendant's counter-claim succeeds in part

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim for specific performance and damages dismissed
  • Defendant entitled to damages for cost of completion and lost rental, subject to calculation as per judgment