Steel v. Young [1907] ScotLR 44_291 (11 January 1907)

Steel v. Young [1907] ScotLR 44_291 (11 January 1907)

The pursuer materially deviated from the contract by substituting milled lime for cement mortar without the defender's consent. The architect's authority did not extend to such a deviation. As the deviation was substantial and could only be remedied by reconstruction at a cost exceeding the contract balance, the pursuer is barred from recovering the contract price.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 44_291
Parties
Pursuer/appellant: William Steel; Defender/respondent: R. L. Young
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 January 1907
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (contract Dispute) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, Second Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; defender assoilzied (absolved).
Legal Topics
Executory Contract, Deviation From Contract, Remedies for Breach, Authority of Architect, Deduction From Contract Price
Contract Law Construction Law Executory Contract Deviation From Contract Remedies for Breach Authority of Architect Deduction From Contract Price

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Steel

Pursuer/appellant

R. L. Young

Defender/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (contract Dispute) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer was entitled to payment of the contract balance after deviating from the contract specification by using milled lime instead of cement mortar without the defender's consent.
  2. 2 Whether the architect's authority sufficed to permit deviation from contract terms.
  3. 3 What remedy is available when a contractor deviates from contract specifications in a material way.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer materially deviated from the contract by substituting milled lime for cement mortar without the defender's consent. The architect's authority did not extend to such a deviation. As the deviation was substantial and could only be remedied by reconstruction at a cost exceeding the contract balance, the pursuer is barred from recovering the contract price.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; defender assoilzied (absolved).

Orders

  • Dismiss the appeal.
  • Affirm the findings in fact of the Sheriff-Substitute.