Gateway Plaza Ltd v White
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE RIMER
- LORD JUSTICE VOS
- SIR TIMOTHY LLOYD
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case revolves around an appeal from a Sheffield County Court order where Gateway Plaza Ltd was found in breach of a settlement agreement for failing to provide necessary documentation, thus prohibiting Mr. White from completing a property purchase. The court held that Gateway's inaction prevented the contractual exchange, affirming the Recorder's decision that Gateway breached its obligations.
Judgment
Sir Timothy Lloyd:
Introduction
This appeal, from an order made by Mr Recorder Philips in the Sheffield County Court on 3 July 2013, requires the court to consider the true construction of an agreement reached in the context of court proceedings. The litigation arose from the non-completion of a contract for the purchase of a plot in a development carried out by the claimant, Gateway Plaza Ltd (Gateway). By the settlement agreement, made on 17 February 2012, Mr White, the defendant, had the opportunity to buy another plot in the development, if he committed himself by exchange by a given date. If so, the litigation would be discontinued as against him. If he did not, the litigation would continue. He did not exchange by the given time or at all, but in answer to Gateway’s contention that the original litigation therefore remains in existence, he argues that the only reason that he did not exchange was that Gateway was in breach of the contract itself, as a result of which he was unable to do so.
The recorder had to decide a preliminary issue, as to whether there was a binding settlement agreement and, if so, whether Gateway was in breach of it. At the hearing it was not in dispute that the settlement agreement was binding. The recorder held that the settlement agreement imposed an obligation on Gateway of which it was in breach, and that it was Gateway’s fault that Mr White did not enter into an agreement to purchase the substituted plot.
Gateway appeals against that finding, with permission granted by Lord Justice Davis. It has been represented on the appeal by Mr Jonathan Cohen, who did not appear below. Mr White was represented, as he had been below, by Mr Paul Brook. Despite Mr Cohen’s powerful submissions I consider that the recorder was right in his conclusion and I would dismiss the appeal. I set out my reasons in what follows.
The essential facts
In 2005 Mr White agreed to buy a plot in a development in Barnsley from Gateway. He acted jointly with a Mr Ian Peace, with whom he was, at that time, in business. The plot formed part of a development which Gateway was undertaking. The property to be bought was not finished until 2010. The contract was not performed by Mr White or Mr Peace, and Gateway forfeited the deposit of about £17,000, and then sued Mr White and Mr Peace for damages. For reasons which it is not necessary to describe, Mr White was unaware of the proceedings until early in 2012. He and Mr Peace had fallen out in 2008.