Forrest v. Scottish County Investment Co., Ltd [1914] ScotLR 66 (17 November 1914)

Forrest v. Scottish County Investment Co., Ltd [1914] ScotLR 66 (17 November 1914)

The contractor deviated from the contract specifications regarding the dimensions of rybats and the use of concrete instead of rubble, but the employer accepted the completed work, did not seek rectification, and suffered no proven loss. The architect's approval did not authorize deviation from clear contract terms, but in the absence of a claim for damages or rectification, the contractor is entitled to the contract price, less minor deductions for uncompleted details.

Citation
[1914] ScotLR 66
Parties
Pursuer: Elphinstone Forrest; Defender: Scottish County Investment Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 November 1914
Procedural Posture
Building Contract Dispute / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session (appeal/reclaiming Motion)
Outcome
Pursuer entitled to recover contract balance, less minor deduction; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to (majority decision).
Legal Topics
Building Contracts, Deviation From Contract, Architect's Authority, Remedies for Breach, Quantum Lucratus, Damages, Acceptance of Work
Contract Law Construction Law Building Contracts Deviation From Contract Architect's Authority Remedies for Breach Quantum Lucratus Damages +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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elphinstone Forrest

Pursuer

Scottish County Investment Company, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Building Contract Dispute / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session (appeal/reclaiming Motion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contractor's deviation from specified dimensions in the contract, with architect's approval, disentitles him from recovering the contract price.
  2. 2 Whether the architect had authority to approve deviations from the contract specifications.
  3. 3 What remedy is available to the employer when work is accepted but not strictly conforming to contract.

Ratio Decidendi

The contractor deviated from the contract specifications regarding the dimensions of rybats and the use of concrete instead of rubble, but the employer accepted the completed work, did not seek rectification, and suffered no proven loss. The architect's approval did not authorize deviation from clear contract terms, but in the absence of a claim for damages or rectification, the contractor is entitled to the contract price, less minor deductions for uncompleted details.

Court Disposition

Pursuer entitled to recover contract balance, less minor deduction; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to (majority decision).

Orders

  • Decree for pursuer for £633, 16s. less £5 for minor uncompleted work.