ANGUS JOINERY LIMITED v. JAMES AND VALERIE McKAY [2010] ScotSC 182 (04 November 2010)

ANGUS JOINERY LIMITED v. JAMES AND VALERIE McKAY [2010] ScotSC 182 (04 November 2010)

The pursuers were in material breach of contract by refusing to complete the installation of windows without justification, and the windows supplied were not of satisfactory quality or fit for purpose. The defenders were not in material breach. The defenders are entitled to damages for the cost of replacement windows and for distress and inconvenience, with interest.

Citation
[2010] ScotSC 182
Parties
Pursuer: Angus Joinery Limited; Defender: James McKay; Defender: Valerie McKay
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (contractual Dispute) / Judgment After Proof
Outcome
Judgment for the defenders (James and Valerie McKay) on principal action and counterclaim.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Implied Terms, Damages, Mutuality of Contract, Consumer Contracts, Supply of Goods and Services
Contract Law Consumer Law Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Implied Terms Damages Mutuality of Contract Consumer Contracts +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angus Joinery Limited

Pursuer

James McKay

Defender

Valerie McKay

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (contractual Dispute) / Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders were in material breach of contract by their behaviour towards the pursuers' employees
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers were in material breach of contract by failing to complete the contract
  3. 3 Whether the windows supplied and installed were of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers were in material breach of contract by refusing to complete the installation of windows without justification, and the windows supplied were not of satisfactory quality or fit for purpose. The defenders were not in material breach. The defenders are entitled to damages for the cost of replacement windows and for distress and inconvenience, with interest.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the defenders (James and Valerie McKay) on principal action and counterclaim.

Orders

  • Decree against the pursuers for payment to the defenders of £11,750 sterling, with interest at 8% per annum from 3rd March 2010 until payment.
  • All questions relating to expenses reserved for further hearing.