Ascent Project Seychelles Pty Ltd v Maestro Ltd & Or (CC 07/2017) [2018] SCSC 8118 (19 March 2018)

Ascent Project Seychelles Pty Ltd v Maestro Ltd & Or (CC 07/2017) [2018] SCSC 8118 (19 March 2018)

The First Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for the unpaid contractual sum as there is sufficient evidence of breach and no defence was filed. The Second Defendant is not liable as there is no privity of contract, no agency, and no valid stipulation for another in the contract benefiting the Plaintiff.

Citation
[2018] SCSC 8118
Parties
Plaintiff: ASCENT PROJECT SEYCHELLES PTY LTD; First Defendant: MAESTRO LTD; Second Defendant: Second Defendant
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
19 March 2018
Case Number
CC 07/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff against the First Defendant; claim against the Second Defendant dismissed.
Legal Topics
Privity of Contract, Stipulation for Another, Agency, Subcontracting, Third Party Rights
Source Language
English
Contract Law Privity of Contract Stipulation for Another Agency Subcontracting Third Party Rights

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ASCENT PROJECT SEYCHELLES PTY LTD

Plaintiff

MAESTRO LTD

First Defendant

Second Defendant

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for unpaid contractual sums
  2. 2 Whether the Second Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff under the contract or as an agent or beneficiary

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for the unpaid contractual sum as there is sufficient evidence of breach and no defence was filed. The Second Defendant is not liable as there is no privity of contract, no agency, and no valid stipulation for another in the contract benefiting the Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff against the First Defendant; claim against the Second Defendant dismissed.

Orders

  • First Defendant to pay Plaintiff SR 477,718.97 with commercial interests and costs