GPT Realisations Ltd v Panatown Ltd
Language: English Series: Construction Industry Law Letter ; 1992 CILL 787-790(4)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: ORC 8 October 1992. Concerns three actions, in each of which (G) claimed against (P) an injunction requiring P to open a trust account and pay into that the retention monies. It was agreed that P, the employers under the contracts, had never placed retention monies in a separate account. G went into administrative receivership. P contended that it would be wrong to require them to pay money into a trust account as they would be entitled to retain alleged set-offs. Also if they were restrained from removing the money from the accounts they would have to resort to litigation against an insolvent company. It was "held" that not granting the injunctions sought carried a lower risk of injustice if the court should turn out to be `wrong`. (ABS 47393)| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS47590 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 62572-1001 |
ORC 8 October 1992. Concerns three actions, in each of which (G) claimed against (P) an injunction requiring P to open a trust account and pay into that the retention monies. It was agreed that P, the employers under the contracts, had never placed retention monies in a separate account. G went into administrative receivership. P contended that it would be wrong to require them to pay money into a trust account as they would be entitled to retain alleged set-offs. Also if they were restrained from removing the money from the accounts they would have to resort to litigation against an insolvent company. It was "held" that not granting the injunctions sought carried a lower risk of injustice if the court should turn out to be `wrong`. (ABS 47393)