Cheshire Contractors Pty Ltd v Everett

Case

[2018] QSC 228

8 October 2018


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Cheshire Contractors Pty Lt v Everett [2018] QSC 228 [2018] QSC 228 8 October 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cheshire Contractors Pty Ltd v Everett was a case heard by the Queensland District Court. The plaintiff, Cheshire Contractors, sought payment for works they had performed under an oral contract with the defendant, Mark Everett. The dispute centred on the performance and payment of two phases of work on Mr Everett’s property, with the plaintiff alleging breaches of contract, non-payment, and non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. The defendant, on the other hand, argued that the works were not performed to the required standard and that any further works were contingent on the satisfactory completion of the initial phase.

The court was tasked with determining several key legal issues. First, it had to ascertain whether the works completed under phase one of the contract were compliant with the agreed terms. Second, the court needed to address whether there were any remedial works required that might affect the plaintiff's entitlement to payment. Third, it had to consider whether there was any loss or damage occasioned by the defendant's actions. Additionally, the court examined whether a promise made in December 2011 to delay the seeking of payment amounted to a promissory estoppel, and whether there existed any agreement for payment for the works completed under phase two.

In its judgment, the court found that the works performed under phase one were largely compliant with the contract, though there were some minor deviations. The court also determined that no remedial works were necessary, and therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to payment for the works completed. Regarding the December 2011 promise, the court held that it did not constitute a promissory estoppel as it did not create a binding obligation. Lastly, the court concluded that an agreement for payment existed for the works under phase two, based on the oral contract and the conduct of the parties. The court awarded judgment to the plaintiff in the amount of $450,493.59, with further directions to be given on costs.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Contract Law

Legal Concepts

  • Contract Formation

  • Breach of Contract

  • Repudiation & Termination

  • Unconscionable Conduct

  • Promissory Estoppel

  • Compensatory Damages

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

9

Statutory Material Cited

0