Durabella Ltd v J Jarvis and Sons Ltd
Series: Construction Industry Law Letter ; [2001] CILL 1796-1798(3) | Construction Law Reports ; [2002] Con LR 145-156(12)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: TCC 19 September 2001. In proceedings following the termination of the defendant's (J) employment the employer (G) alleged that flooring work carried out by the claimant (D) were defective. No breakdown of the settlement figure was given, although it was recorded that no value was included in it for D's works and it did take into account G's counterclaim for them. D claimed payment from J who counterclaimed for damages including amounts said to have been paid to G in the settlement for the defective work. J also sought to rely on a 'pay when paid' clause in its standard contract terms. "Held" : J had not successfully demonstrated that it had not been paid for D's work and could not rely on the 'pay when paid' clause as it was it's own fault that it had not been paid.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS64857 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 116029-1001 |
TCC 19 September 2001. In proceedings following the termination of the defendant's (J) employment the employer (G) alleged that flooring work carried out by the claimant (D) were defective. No breakdown of the settlement figure was given, although it was recorded that no value was included in it for D's works and it did take into account G's counterclaim for them. D claimed payment from J who counterclaimed for damages including amounts said to have been paid to G in the settlement for the defective work. J also sought to rely on a 'pay when paid' clause in its standard contract terms. "Held" : J had not successfully demonstrated that it had not been paid for D's work and could not rely on the 'pay when paid' clause as it was it's own fault that it had not been paid.