Image from Google Jackets

Richard J Thompson (trading as R J Thompson International) v James K Charlesworth [electronic resource]

Language: English Publication details: 2009Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2009] EWHC B3 (TCC), 17 February 2009. The case relates to the determination of costs of electrical works in absence of a written contract. Mr James K Charlesworth (C) asked his friend Richard J Thompson (T) to carry out electrical installation works on a house in development. In their discussions, they mentioned an amount for the works. But no contract was written down, only two quotations provided by Mr Thompson. As the works were proceeding, T issued a partial invoice for the works carried out and informed C that a full costing of the work would be sent to him. More works were necessary than envisaged at the start so T issued further invoices. Disagreement occurred on the initial amount on whether it was a total cost of works or an estimate. C considered it was a fixed price contract, T that it was only an estimate and that it was entitled to a payment for materials and labour carried out. "Held": The judge was in favour of T. The limited documentation, an invoice and quotations, would not permit to give a fixed price, but an estimate for works. There would be no need to send a revised costing if the price had been fixed at the start.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE JUDGMENT (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 147253-2001

[2009] EWHC B3 (TCC), 17 February 2009. The case relates to the determination of costs of electrical works in absence of a written contract. Mr James K Charlesworth (C) asked his friend Richard J Thompson (T) to carry out electrical installation works on a house in development. In their discussions, they mentioned an amount for the works. But no contract was written down, only two quotations provided by Mr Thompson. As the works were proceeding, T issued a partial invoice for the works carried out and informed C that a full costing of the work would be sent to him. More works were necessary than envisaged at the start so T issued further invoices. Disagreement occurred on the initial amount on whether it was a total cost of works or an estimate. C considered it was a fixed price contract, T that it was only an estimate and that it was entitled to a payment for materials and labour carried out. "Held": The judge was in favour of T. The limited documentation, an invoice and quotations, would not permit to give a fixed price, but an estimate for works. There would be no need to send a revised costing if the price had been fixed at the start.