31 May 2006
DICK V LEE & ANOR HC DUN CIV 2004 412 310
- Citation
- openlaw-5433be52_47ca_4495_8d10_4e3faa226bbc.pdf
- Court
- High Court
There was no concluded agreement that work would be charged on a time and materials basis. The court implied a term that the defendants would pay a reasonable and proper price. On the evidence the most reliable indicator of the commercial balance was the plaintiff's 20 August 2003 invoice and the detailed Melrose Street claim; accordingly the court allowed $61,792.16 for the commercial premises and $23,231.48 for Melrose Street, totalling judgment of $85,023.64 against the first defendants. The estoppel defence failed. The claim against the second defendant was dismissed/ignored due to lack o…