000			01401cam a2200277 4500
001			ABS64319
008			010813n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u114065
100			_aBrewer, G
245			_aLetters of intent and formation of contract
260			_c2001
490			_aContract Journal _v409(6338) 1 August 2001, 21(1)
520			_a0iscusses the case "Carillion Construction Ltd (trading as Crown House Engineering) v Ballast Plc", CA 12 July 2001 where the parties became involved in a dispute over payments claimed by Crown House. No formal contract was entered into but Ballast wrote a letter of intent to Crown House, stating its 'intention to enter into subcontract' for mechanical and electrical installations, on the basis of the latest revised price. Crown House argued that the letter was an acceptance of its quotation based upon the revised specification. However the Court of Appeal considered that a letter of intent would normally be insufficient to establish contractual agreements.
590			_aABS
650			_aLETTER OF INTENT
650			_aContracts _96232
650			_aSUBCONTRACTS
650			_aCONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
650			_aDISPUTES
650			_aTENDERS
650			_aCROWN HOUSE LTD V BALLAST PLC
650			_aCARILLION
650			_aTERMS AND CONDITIONS
690			_aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS
942			_n0
999			_c67988 _d67988