WEST REG STREET (PROPERTY) LIMITED AGAINST CENTRAL DEMOLITION LIMITED [2018] ScotCS CSOH_98 (12 October 2018)

WEST REG STREET (PROPERTY) LIMITED AGAINST CENTRAL DEMOLITION LIMITED [2018] ScotCS CSOH_98 (12 October 2018)

The contract, properly construed as a whole and in light of the factual matrix, allocated to the defender the risk and cost of removing asbestos encountered during demolition. Clause 2.1D expressly placed responsibility for contamination, including asbestos, on the defender, and there was no credible evidence of any binding assurance to the contrary. The contract sum was inclusive of such work, and the defender was not entitled to additional payment or a variation for asbestos removal discovered during demolition.

Citation
[2018] ScotCS CSOH_98
Parties
Pursuer: West Reg. Street (Property) Limited; Defender: Central Demolition Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action (construction Contract Dispute) / Proof Before Answer (trial on Merits)
Outcome
Declarator granted in favour of the pursuer.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Construction Contracts, Allocation of Risk for Asbestos Removal, Scope of Works Under Lump Sum Contract, Variation and Valuation of Additional Works
Construction Law Contract Law Interpretation of Construction Contracts Allocation of Risk for Asbestos Removal Scope of Works Under Lump Sum Contract Variation and Valuation of Additional Works

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

Parties

West Reg. Street (Property) Limited

Pursuer

Central Demolition Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action (construction Contract Dispute) / Proof Before Answer (trial on Merits)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract required the defender to remove and dispose of asbestos encountered during demolition without additional payment or variation.
  2. 2 Whether asbestos encountered during demolition constituted 'contamination' under clause 2.1D of the contract.
  3. 3 Whether the contract sum included the cost of asbestos removal discovered during demolition.

Ratio Decidendi

The contract, properly construed as a whole and in light of the factual matrix, allocated to the defender the risk and cost of removing asbestos encountered during demolition. Clause 2.1D expressly placed responsibility for contamination, including asbestos, on the defender, and there was no credible evidence of any binding assurance to the contrary. The contract sum was inclusive of such work, and the defender was not entitled to additional payment or a variation for asbestos removal discovered during demolition.

Court Disposition

Declarator granted in favour of the pursuer.

Orders

  • It is declared that the defender is obliged to remove and dispose of any asbestos encountered during demolition without the need for any variation to be instructed and without any additional payment being made in respect of that removal and disposal.