Murray v Camerons Limited [2021] JRC 234 (21 September 2021)

Murray v Camerons Limited [2021] JRC 234 (21 September 2021)

The quantum of the Defendant's entitlement is to be calculated using Interim Certificate No. 14 as the starting point, with adjustments only as permitted by the Court's prior guidance, and the Plaintiff's Notional Final Account methodology is rejected as inconsistent with the Judgment.

Citation
[2021] JRC 234
Parties
Plaintiff: Sir Bob Murray CBE; Defendant: Camerons Limited
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
21 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Quantum Assessment Following Liability Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Defendant on quantum assessment.
Legal Topics
Quantum Meruit, JCT Standard Form Contract, Interim Valuations, Overhead and Profit, Variation Claims
Contract Law Construction Law Quantum Meruit JCT Standard Form Contract Interim Valuations Overhead and Profit Variation Claims

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

Parties

Sir Bob Murray CBE

Plaintiff

Camerons Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Quantum Assessment Following Liability Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How should the quantum of the Defendant's entitlement under the construction contract be calculated?
  2. 2 Is the Defendant entitled to additional sums for overhead and profit, sub-contractor claims, or legal costs?
  3. 3 Should the Plaintiff's expert's Notional Final Account methodology be adopted?

Ratio Decidendi

The quantum of the Defendant's entitlement is to be calculated using Interim Certificate No. 14 as the starting point, with adjustments only as permitted by the Court's prior guidance, and the Plaintiff's Notional Final Account methodology is rejected as inconsistent with the Judgment.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Defendant on quantum assessment.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay Defendant £337,333, excluding interest, as detailed in the Judgment.