JOHN MCMANUS v. GRAHAM AND JANETTE KELLY [2010] ScotSC 143 (20 August 2010)

JOHN MCMANUS v. GRAHAM AND JANETTE KELLY [2010] ScotSC 143 (20 August 2010)

The pursuer was in fundamental breach of contract by abandoning the works before completion and demanding further payment when not contractually entitled. The standard of workmanship fell materially below that required by the implied term of satisfactory quality. The defenders were entitled to treat the contract as repudiated, withhold further payment, and recover damages for the cost of remedial works. The pursuer was not entitled to further payment beyond sums already received, and was liable to pay the defenders the reasonable cost of remedying defects and completing the works.

Citation
[2010] ScotSC 143
Parties
Pursuer: John McManus, trading as Caledonian Driveways and Construction; Defender: Graham Kelly; Defender: Janette Kelly
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract/construction Dispute) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Defenders assoilzied (absolved) from the principal action; decree granted for defenders on counterclaim.
Legal Topics
Oral Contracts, Breach of Contract, Implied Terms, Quantum Meruit, Entire Contract, Remedial Damages
Contract Law Construction Law Oral Contracts Breach of Contract Implied Terms Quantum Meruit Entire Contract Remedial Damages

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John McManus, trading as Caledonian Driveways and Construction

Pursuer

Graham Kelly

Defender

Janette Kelly

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract/construction Dispute) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer was entitled to payment for works carried out under an oral contract for landscaping and construction.
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was in breach of contract by failing to complete the works to a satisfactory standard and abandoning the site.
  3. 3 Whether the defenders were entitled to damages for the cost of remedial works due to the pursuer's defective workmanship.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer was in fundamental breach of contract by abandoning the works before completion and demanding further payment when not contractually entitled. The standard of workmanship fell materially below that required by the implied term of satisfactory quality. The defenders were entitled to treat the contract as repudiated, withhold further payment, and recover damages for the cost of remedial works. The pursuer was not entitled to further payment beyond sums already received, and was liable to pay the defenders the reasonable cost of remedying defects and completing the works.

Court Disposition

Defenders assoilzied (absolved) from the principal action; decree granted for defenders on counterclaim.

Orders

  • Decree for payment by the pursuer to the defenders in the sum of £2041.38 sterling, with interest at 8% per annum from date of decree until payment.
  • Expenses reserved; parties appointed to be heard on expenses on 6 October 2010 at 10.00 am.