Claymore Services Ltd v Nautilus Properties Ltd [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2007] EWHC 805 (TCC), 20 March 2007. Considers the application of interest in the event of non-payment. Claimant contractor (C) issued proceedings against defendant property owner (N) for payment for building work carried out at N?s property. Prior to the trial, C had accepted there was no contract and claimed the sums should be paid as a quantum meruit, and it was agreed N would pay £750 000 to C. The court had to determine the period during which interest should apply and to fix an appropriate rate. C argued that interest should start to run from the date of completion of its works or from June 2004 when N had had time to consider C's final accounts. N contended that no interest should be payable until the sum due to C became apparent in December 2006. "Held": judgment in part for C. Where a claim was based in quantum meruit, interest for non-payment should only run from the date when the sum due was ascertainable, which in this case was June 2004. However, as C was guilty of unreasonable delay in commencing litigation, the interest payable to C should be reduced by 50% for one year.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 138433-2001 |
[2007] EWHC 805 (TCC), 20 March 2007. Considers the application of interest in the event of non-payment. Claimant contractor (C) issued proceedings against defendant property owner (N) for payment for building work carried out at N?s property. Prior to the trial, C had accepted there was no contract and claimed the sums should be paid as a quantum meruit, and it was agreed N would pay £750 000 to C. The court had to determine the period during which interest should apply and to fix an appropriate rate. C argued that interest should start to run from the date of completion of its works or from June 2004 when N had had time to consider C's final accounts. N contended that no interest should be payable until the sum due to C became apparent in December 2006. "Held": judgment in part for C. Where a claim was based in quantum meruit, interest for non-payment should only run from the date when the sum due was ascertainable, which in this case was June 2004. However, as C was guilty of unreasonable delay in commencing litigation, the interest payable to C should be reduced by 50% for one year.