E & J Glasgow Ltd v. UGC Estates Ltd [2005] ScotCS CSOH_63 (16 May 2005)

E & J Glasgow Ltd v. UGC Estates Ltd [2005] ScotCS CSOH_63 (16 May 2005)

The pursuers have pled a relevant case that the defenders, by their conduct, may have waived strict compliance with the contractual procedures for variations under the AFL, and that the claims for payment for variations and damages for breach of implied terms should proceed to proof before answer. The question of waiver and the sufficiency of the pursuers' averments cannot be determined without inquiry into the facts.

Citation
[2005] ScotCS CSOH_63
Parties
Pursuer: E & J Glasgow Limited; Defender: UGC Estates Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Debate on Relevancy (motion to Dismiss)
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed on the pursuers' claims; defenders' motion to dismiss refused.
Legal Topics
Waiver of Contractual Terms, Variation of Contract, Implied Terms, Building Contracts, Damages for Breach of Contract
Contract Law Commercial Property Law Construction Law Waiver of Contractual Terms Variation of Contract Implied Terms Building Contracts Damages for Breach of Contract

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E & J Glasgow Limited

Pursuer

UGC Estates Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Debate on Relevancy (motion to Dismiss)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuers' claims for payment for variations and damages for breach of contract are relevant and should proceed to proof
  2. 2 Whether the defenders waived strict compliance with contractual procedures for variations under the Agreement for Lease (AFL)
  3. 3 Whether the pursuers have pled a relevant case of waiver or variation of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers have pled a relevant case that the defenders, by their conduct, may have waived strict compliance with the contractual procedures for variations under the AFL, and that the claims for payment for variations and damages for breach of implied terms should proceed to proof before answer. The question of waiver and the sufficiency of the pursuers' averments cannot be determined without inquiry into the facts.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed on the pursuers' claims; defenders' motion to dismiss refused.

Orders

  • Case to proceed to proof before answer on the variation and breach of implied terms claims.