Bath and North East Somerset District Council v Mowlem plc
Series: Building Law Reports ; [2004] BLR 153-162(10)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2004] EWCA Civ 722, 20 February 2004. Bath (B) had contracted Mowlem (M) to carry out restoration works to its spa buildings. Completion was delayed and paintwork had caused problems. B instructed M to remove the paint, and when M refused, B gave notice to M that it would instruct another firm to do so and charge M. This firm was denied entry to the site by M. B sought an interim injunction aginst M. M argued that the liquidated damages provided what the parties had accepted as an adequate remedy. B asserted they would not be adequately compensated. This was granted. M appealed. "Held": the appeal was dismissed as the granting of an injunction would cause M no disadvantage; the judge's decision to grant the interlocutory injunction was upheld. View judgment at www.nadr.co.uk.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS67985 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 126814-1001 |
[2004] EWCA Civ 722, 20 February 2004. Bath (B) had contracted Mowlem (M) to carry out restoration works to its spa buildings. Completion was delayed and paintwork had caused problems. B instructed M to remove the paint, and when M refused, B gave notice to M that it would instruct another firm to do so and charge M. This firm was denied entry to the site by M. B sought an interim injunction aginst M. M argued that the liquidated damages provided what the parties had accepted as an adequate remedy. B asserted they would not be adequately compensated. This was granted. M appealed. "Held": the appeal was dismissed as the granting of an injunction would cause M no disadvantage; the judge's decision to grant the interlocutory injunction was upheld. View judgment at www.nadr.co.uk.