Speirs Ltd v. Petersen [1924] ScotLR 349 (21 February 1924)

Speirs Ltd v. Petersen [1924] ScotLR 349 (21 February 1924)

The contractor's failure to provide adequate damp-proofing was a breach of contract but not so material as to disentitle recovery of the contract price. The proper remedy was to deduct from the price the sum required to bring the work into conformity with the contract. The defender was ordered to pay the contract price less £700 for the cost of remedying the defects.

Citation
[1924] ScotLR 349
Parties
Pursuer: Speirs Limited; Defender: Sir William Petersen
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 February 1924
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
partly allowed (interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled in part)
Legal Topics
Building Contracts, Breach of Contract, Remedies for Defective Performance, Implied Terms, Damages and Set Off
Contract Law Construction Law Building Contracts Breach of Contract Remedies for Defective Performance Implied Terms Damages and Set Off

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

Parties

Speirs Limited

Pursuer

Sir William Petersen

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contractor's failure to provide adequate damp-proofing constituted a material breach disentitling recovery of the contract price
  2. 2 Whether the employer is entitled to withhold the contract price or must pay subject to deduction for defects

Ratio Decidendi

The contractor's failure to provide adequate damp-proofing was a breach of contract but not so material as to disentitle recovery of the contract price. The proper remedy was to deduct from the price the sum required to bring the work into conformity with the contract. The defender was ordered to pay the contract price less £700 for the cost of remedying the defects.

Court Disposition

partly allowed (interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled in part)

Orders

  • Defender to pay pursuers £1,470 7s. 3d. with interest as concluded for under the first conclusion of the summons.
  • Interlocutor otherwise adhered to as regards other heads.