Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Waksman |
| Judgment Date | 07 December 2018 |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC) |
| Docket Number | No. HT-2018-000250 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court) |
| Date | 07 December 2018 |
[2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURT OF ENGLAND & WALES
TECHNOLOGY & CONSTRUCTION COURT
Rolls Building
Fetter Lane
London EC4A 1NL
Mr Justice Waksman
No. HT-2018-000250
Mr S. Dennison QC and Ms C. Slow (instructed by Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of the Claimant.
Mr S. Hale (instructed by Kennedys Law LLP) appeared on behalf of the First Defendant.
Mr D. Woolgar (instructed by Silver Shemmings Ash) appeared on behalf of the Second Defendant.
Miss C. Packman (instructed by Mills & Reeve LLP) appeared on behalf of the Third Defendant.
I have to deal with the question of costs, first of all, as between the claimant on the one hand and what I might describe as the substantive defendants, that is D2 and D3, on the other. It is correct to say that the injunction which gave rise to this expedited trial was ordered on the basis of the claimant's position — in which it sought to establish that a certificate of practical completion cannot at this stage be given — which would have the effect (because of the longstop date) of effectively releasing the claimant from its obligation to enter into the twenty-one year lease with D2. At one level it can be said that this was a relatively straightforward point of construction which was the subject of Declaration 4 to the effect that any breach would prevent practical completion. If that was the only matter in dispute the application would have led to an expedited trial earlier than it in fact did and for a shorter period than it did.
The reason why it did not so proceed was because althoughit essential block for the claimant to establish the breach, the second and third defendant took a root and branch objection to every aspect of the breach argument by which I mean: first of all, on their construction, the planning drawings were not the governing drawings anyway; even if they were, the agreement should have been rectified; even if it should not, there was an implied term or the true construction was such, that in effect the planning drawings would be jettisoned; and even if none of that was right, there was an estoppel by convention; and, in any event, there was not even in relation to the rooms which were ultimately complained of a clear admission that they would otherwise be in breach; the latter is why there was an admittedly short part of my judgment dealing with some very residual arguments as to why the rooms size was in breach, even if all the other arguments had failed.
In those circumstances, while it is perfectly true...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gwr Property Co Limited Against Forrest Outdoor Media Limited
...ed) at para 21.158 – 9. This definition was adopted and augmented by Waksman, J in Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC) in the context of a non-JCT contract (at paras [75]-[82]). The building contract does not correspond with the licence for works and so a c......
-
Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd
...determine the AFL; and b) the Employer's Agent could not validly certify practical completion. In a judgment dated 7 December 2018 ( [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC)), Waksman J rejected Mears' claims for declarations to that effect (Declarations 1–4). Mears now appeal against the refusal to make De......
-
Mears Limited v Costplan Services (South East) Limited & Others [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC)
...Limited v Costplan Services (South East) Limited & Others [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC) concerned the development of student accommodation in Plymouth. Mears Limited ("Mears") alleged that there were substantial and material deviations from the contractual drawings and sought declarations prev......
-
Material Breach Of Contract And Practical Completion
...of contract. Mears had appealed from the first instance decision in Mears Limited v Costplan Services (South East) Limited & Ors [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC) in which a number of declarations sought by Mears were Mears was a provider of student accommodation. PNSL had engaged a builder to des......
-
Contract administration
...which may be of an aesthetic nature, as opposed to being functional defects: see Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC) at [81], per Waksman J (appeal dismissed: [2019] EWCA Civ 502). ContraCt aDMiniStration de minimis , 359 practical completion will not have ......
-
Table of cases
...Ltd v Samuel Williams (Dagenham Docks) Ltd (1977) 16 BLr 49 I.5.156, II.7.54 Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd [2018] EWhC 3363 (TCC) I.5.117, I.5.120, II.9.66 Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd [2019] EWCa Civ 502 I.5.117, I.5.118, I.5.119, II.14.03 Mears Ltd v Lee......
-
Breach of contract and termination
...Trust v Compass Group UK and Ireland Ltd [2013] BLr 265 at 285 [126], per Jackson LJ; Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd [2018] EWhC 3363 (TCC) at [36], per Waksman J (appeal dismissed: [2019] EWCa Civ 502). Nor, where a contract permits termination for a “substantial breach”, n......