Martifer UK Ltd v Lend Lease Construction (EMEA) Ltd [2015] ScotCS CSOH_81 (19 June 2015)

Martifer UK Ltd v Lend Lease Construction (EMEA) Ltd [2015] ScotCS CSOH_81 (19 June 2015)

Inclusion of IRS 4 and 4170 in the Sub-Contract Documents did not impose a contractually binding obligation to complete the works in accordance with the detailed programme in IRS 4. IRS 4 was an information release schedule for the main contract, not a programme for the sub-contract, and its inclusion served to affirm the general sequencing approach rather than to create binding obligations as to dates or sequence. The contract imposed broader obligations of diligence and cooperation, and required the pursuer to submit its own programme. The inconsistencies between IRS 4, 4170, and the actual contract dates further indicated no intention to make IRS 4 binding.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_81
Parties
Pursuer: Martifer UK Limited; Defender: Lend Lease Construction (EMEA) Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Construction Contract Dispute / Judgment After Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Pursuer's claim for declarator refused; defender assoilzied (absolved) in respect of conclusion 1.1.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contract Documents, Binding Nature of Construction Programmes, Sub Contract Obligations, Programme Incorporation, Sequencing of Works
Construction Law Contract Law Interpretation of Contract Documents Binding Nature of Construction Programmes Sub Contract Obligations Programme Incorporation Sequencing of 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martifer UK Limited

Pursuer

Lend Lease Construction (EMEA) Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Construction Contract Dispute / Judgment After Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether IRS 4 and 4170 constituted a contractually binding programme regulating the parties' rights and duties under the sub-contract
  2. 2 Whether inclusion of IRS 4 in the Sub-Contract Documents imposed an obligation to follow its detailed programme

Ratio Decidendi

Inclusion of IRS 4 and 4170 in the Sub-Contract Documents did not impose a contractually binding obligation to complete the works in accordance with the detailed programme in IRS 4. IRS 4 was an information release schedule for the main contract, not a programme for the sub-contract, and its inclusion served to affirm the general sequencing approach rather than to create binding obligations as to dates or sequence. The contract imposed broader obligations of diligence and cooperation, and required the pursuer to submit its own programme. The inconsistencies between IRS 4, 4170, and the actual contract dates further indicated no intention to make IRS 4 binding.

Court Disposition

Pursuer's claim for declarator refused; defender assoilzied (absolved) in respect of conclusion 1.1.

Orders

  • Pursuer's third and fourth pleas-in-law repelled
  • Defender assoilzied in respect of conclusion 1.1