Melville Dundas Ltd (in receivership) and others v George Wimpey UK Ltd and others [electronic resource]
Melville Dundas Ltd (in receivership) and others v George Wimpey UK Ltd and others [electronic resource]
- 2007
[2007] UKHL 18, 25 April 2007. Concerned a dispute over liability to make an interim payment under a building contract and called into question the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 s111. Appellant (W) appealed against a decision ([2005] ScotCS CSIH 18, L132696) that it had to make an interim payment to the respondent (M) under the terms of a contract between the parties. W argued that clause 27 of the contract prevented payment being made to an insolvent contractor. A key issue to decide was whether the effect of clause 27 was invalidated by provisions of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 and whether W was entitled to withhold the interim payment even though it had failed to serve a notice of its intention to do so in accordance with the 1996 Act s111. "Held": appeal allowed by a majority of 3:2. The 1996 Act s111 had to be construed in a way that was compatible with the operation of clause 27.
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 S111
MELVILLE DUNDAS LTD AND OTHERS V GEORGE WIMPEY UK LTD AND OTHERS
United Kingdom--
[2007] UKHL 18, 25 April 2007. Concerned a dispute over liability to make an interim payment under a building contract and called into question the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 s111. Appellant (W) appealed against a decision ([2005] ScotCS CSIH 18, L132696) that it had to make an interim payment to the respondent (M) under the terms of a contract between the parties. W argued that clause 27 of the contract prevented payment being made to an insolvent contractor. A key issue to decide was whether the effect of clause 27 was invalidated by provisions of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 and whether W was entitled to withhold the interim payment even though it had failed to serve a notice of its intention to do so in accordance with the 1996 Act s111. "Held": appeal allowed by a majority of 3:2. The 1996 Act s111 had to be construed in a way that was compatible with the operation of clause 27.
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 S111
MELVILLE DUNDAS LTD AND OTHERS V GEORGE WIMPEY UK LTD AND OTHERS
United Kingdom--