|
(AMOS
WRIGHT |
PLAINTIFF |
BETWEEN |
(
(AND
(
|
|
|
(EDNIE
DOWNER |
DEFENDANT |
Supreme
Court
Action No. 252 of 1981
9th February, 1983.
Moe, CJ.
Mr. Dean
Lindo S. C. for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Denys Barrow for the Defendant.
Building
Contract - Breach of Contract - Premature repudiation of
Contract by Plaintiff without giving Defendant adequate
notice - Time not of essence to the contract - Special Damages
- Assessment of Special Damages.
J
U D G M E N T
The Defendant
claimed that the Plaintiff owed him $1,719.50 due under a
building contract entered between them in May 1980. By the
contract he, the Defendant, agreed to build premises for the
Plaintiff and the Plaintiff agreed to pay the sum of $7,060.00.
He had virtually completed all work under the contract when
the Plaintiff wrongfully prevented him from completing the
work, and at that time he had been paid the sum of $5,340.50.
The Plaintiff replied that the Defendant agreed to the building
contract at an estimated price of $6,860.00. He denied that
he prevented the Defendant from completing the work and said
that the Defendant refused to work for two weeks continuously
and then quit the job of his own accord. He claims that the
work done was valued at only $2,732.00 and seeks the sum of
$2,608.50 as overpayment.
The first
issue for determination was whether there was agreement as
to the amount to be paid to the Defendant under the contract.
The Plaintiff sought to establish that the contract called
for payment in accordance with calculations shown in an estimate
(admitted as an Exhibit). The evidence from both Defendant
and Plaintiff that $5,340.50 was paid to the Defendant does
not support the Plaintiff's contention and I reject it. I
accepted the Defendant's evidence, firstly, that there was
an agreement to a contract price of $6,860.00 and later there
was agreement to a further $200 for extra work.
The next
issue was whether the Defendant was prevented from concluding
the contract. Again, I accepted the evidence of the Defendant
supported by one Jeremiah Cassanova that the Plaintiff stopped
the Defendant working on the building. The Defendant said
one Thursday he wasn't feeling well and told the Plaintiff.
He also told him when he felt better he would finish the work
on Friday. The Plaintiff told him if he didn't work that Thursday,
he shouldn't come back on the job anymore. When he went the
Friday morning to the site he saw someone else on the job.
The Plaintiff told him he didn't have any more job with him.
So, he took up his tools and went home.
I then
turned to see whether the Plaintiff was entitled to bring
the contract between himself and the Defendant to an end in
the way he did. I was satisfied that the Plaintiff stopped
the Defendant from working because the work was taking long
to be concluded, the Defendant was absent from the work site
on occasions when he was expected to be there, and the Plaintiff
was not satisfied with certain work done while the Defendant
was absent. The evidence of Mr. Downer is that he told the
Plaintiff he would give him the job in three months. Mr. Wright's
evidence is that the Defendant told him the building would
be completed in about three weeks time. The difference in
evidence as to the statement by the Defendant as to when the
job would be concluded was, in my view, of little consequence
since I do not find on the evidence that time was made the
essence of the contract, in which circumstances, the Plaintiff
ought to have given notice making it so and stating a reasonable
time. This he did not do. He treated the contract as at an
end. He told the Defendant he no longer had the job and he
put someone else on it. In the circumstances, I find that
the Plaintiff was in breach of his contract with the Defendant
and the Defendant is entitled to damages for the breach. What
damage or loss did the Defendant suffer as a result of the
Plaintiff's breach? He was prevented from earning and being
paid the remainder of the contract price amounting to $1,719.50.
I enter
judgment for the Defendant in the sum of $1,719.50 with costs.
The Plaintiff's claim for $2,608.50 overpayment is dismissed.
----------OO----------
|