000			02068cad a22002175a 4500
001			L147326
008			090429e20090318xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u147326
041	0		_aeng
245	0	4	_aMenolly Investments 3 Sarl v Cerep Sarl _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2009
520			_a[2009] EWHC 516 (Ch), 18 March 2009. The case relates to the true interpretation of a building contract. Menolly Investments 3 (M) and Cerep Sarl (C) went into a Share sales agreement under which M would have to buy sales from a company owing a building in Cheapside, London. Practical completion under the building contract was to be reached for this agreement to be fulfilled. It appears that, for the parties, "practical completion" meant "completed for all practical purposes". M argued that there was no practical completion as there was no level access to the retail units as required by the disability discrimination legislation. C objected that the issue of level access had been entered very late in the court proceedings. M had conducted itself as though practical completion was achieved. This proved, for Cerep, that practical completion was achieved and a valid certificate could be issued. "Held": The works necessary to add the level access were part of the contractor's contractual obligations. The issue of the level access did come late in the proceedings. The parties conducted themselves on the basis that practical completion was achieved. C suffered a prejudice by M not raising the point of level access earlier. M were under obligation to complete the Share sale agreement.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aMENOLLY INVESTMENTS 3 SARL V CEREP SARL
650	2	4	_aNATIONAL GRID CO PLC V M25 GROUP LTD
650	2	4	_aNORWICH UNION LIFE INSURANCE SOCIETY V P&O PROPERTY HOLDINGS LTD
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS-CERTIFICATES OF COMPLETION
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2009/516.html _zView the case free of charge at www.bailli.org...
942			_n0
999			_c81481 _d81481