PIP 3 Ltd v Glasgow City Council [2015] ScotCS CSOH_119 (01 September 2015)

PIP 3 Ltd v Glasgow City Council [2015] ScotCS CSOH_119 (01 September 2015)

PIP3 Limited was not entitled to withhold payment of the Initial Purchase Price on the basis of the Council's alleged breach of clause 4.1 or failure to deliver collateral warranties. The contract required payment as a condition precedent to delivery of documents. PIP3's claim for breach of contract and lost profits was irrelevant as its pleadings indicated it would not have proceeded with the development, making it a 'no transaction' case. Only abortive costs may be claimed.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_119
Parties
Pursuer: PIP 3 Limited; Defender: Glasgow City Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Debate on Relevancy Before Answer
Outcome
PIP3 Limited's claim for breach of contract is dismissed as irrelevant; alternative grounds (good faith/negligent misrepresentation) remitted to proof before answer.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Good Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation, Remedies, Option Agreements, Collateral Warranties
Contract Law Property Law Commercial Law Breach of Contract Good Faith Negligent Misrepresentation Remedies Option Agreements +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PIP 3 Limited

Pursuer

Glasgow City Council

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Debate on Relevancy Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether PIP3 Limited was entitled to withhold payment of the Initial Purchase Price due to alleged breaches by Glasgow City Council
  2. 2 Whether Glasgow City Council breached contractual obligations by failing to deliver Site Waste Management Plan and Materials Management Plan
  3. 3 Whether Glasgow City Council breached obligations of good faith or negligently misrepresented the environmental condition of the property

Ratio Decidendi

PIP3 Limited was not entitled to withhold payment of the Initial Purchase Price on the basis of the Council's alleged breach of clause 4.1 or failure to deliver collateral warranties. The contract required payment as a condition precedent to delivery of documents. PIP3's claim for breach of contract and lost profits was irrelevant as its pleadings indicated it would not have proceeded with the development, making it a 'no transaction' case. Only abortive costs may be claimed.

Court Disposition

PIP3 Limited's claim for breach of contract is dismissed as irrelevant; alternative grounds (good faith/negligent misrepresentation) remitted to proof before answer.

Orders

  • Sustain the Council’s first plea-in-law to the extent of dismissing the breach of contract claim
  • Fix a by order hearing to determine further procedure