Lift Manufacturers Ltd v Irish Life Assurance Company Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: McWilliam. J.
• Judgment Date: 21 December 1979
• Neutral Citation: 1980 WJSC-HC 334
• Docket Number: No. 7312P/1979
• Court: High Court
• Date: 21 December 1979

LIFT MANUFACTURERS v. IRISH LIFE ASSURANCE

LIFE MANUFACTURERS LIMITED

.v.

IRISH LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

and

JOHN SISK & SON LIMITED

1980 WJSC-HC 334

No. 7312P/1979

1 Judgment of McWilliam. J., delivered the 21st day of December 1979

2 These proceedings have been commenced by the Plaintiff for specific performance by the Defendants of an agreement contained in correspondence and other documents written, executed or submitted between 2nd June, 1978, and 4th January, 1979.

3 The first-named Defendant is the developer and the second-named Defendant, hereinafter called Sisk, is the builder or main contractor of a substantial complex at Moore Street, Dublin. The Plaintiff carries on the business of the manufacture and installation of lifts and lifting machinery. The contract alleged is for the supply and installation of lifts at the complex for the sum of £119,915.78.

4 By letter of 2nd June, 1978, the Plaintiff was, with thirteen other companies, invited to tender for the work. The Plaintiff forwarded its tender on 26th June, 1978. The form of tender commenced with the following statement:- "Having examined the drawings, general conditions of contract for the main contract, specifications and drawings for the above-mentioned sub-contract works, we undertake to carry out and complete the whole of the said sub-contract works in conformity with the said drawings, specifications and subcontract obligations pursuant to the main contract for the sum given below." It included the following clause "We agree that this offer shall remain open for a period of 10 weeks from the date of this tender and shall be conditional upon the terms of a sub-contract being agreed with the Main Contractor within this period".

5 By letter of 4th January, 1979, Sisk wrote to accept the tender subject to certain conditions, the first of which was "1. That you will enter into a sub-contract agreement based on and modified in accordance with the conditions of the Main Contract." Condition 16 of the Main contract provided as follows:- "(a) No Nominated Sub-Contractor shall be employed upon or in connection with the works against whom the Contractor shall make reasonable objections or (save where the Architect and Contractor shall otherwise agree) who will not enter into a sub-contract which shall indemnify the Contractor against the same obligations in respect of the Sub-Contract as those for which the Contractor is liable in respect of this Contract."

6 The Plaintiff alleges that the main contract was not furnished to it.

7 Although it is not stated in the conditions as such, the letter of 4th January, 1979, also stated "That the standard form of sub-contract would be amended to reflect a change in the basis upon which the insurances for the works had been arranged." It was also stated in the letter that a questionnaire regarding insurances other than the foregoing was enclosed and it was requested that this should be completed and returned. The letter concluded "We would be obliged if you would acknowledge receipt of this letter."

8 There is no averment in the affidavits that this questionnaire was enclosed and I have not been furnished with a copy of it. It appears that there was no reply from the Plaintiff.

9 A postal strike intervened at some stage and there is a dispute about the receipt by the Plaintiff of a letter of 8th February 1979, from Sisk's...