Parkarran Ltd v M. & P. Construction Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Morris
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1996
• Neutral Citation: 1995 WJSC-HC 5224
• Docket Number: [1995 No. 6793P],No. 6793P/1995
• Court: High Court
• Date: 01 January 1996

1995 WJSC-HC 5224

THE HIGH COURT

No. 6793P/1995

PARKARRAN LTD v. M & P CONSTRUCTION LTD

IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACTS, 1954 AND 1980

AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

PARKARRAN LIMITED

PLAINTIFF

AND

M. & P. CONSTRUCTION LIMITED

DEFENDANTS

Citations:

ARBITRATION ACT 1980 S5

HEYMAN V DARWINS LTD 1942 AC 356

LOVE V B & I SHIPPING 1970 101 ILTR 157

Synopsis:

ARBITRATION

Clause

Enforcement - Contract - Terms - Breach - Termination of contract by plaintiff - Action by plaintiff against defendant contractor - Action stayed on defendant's motion - Whether arbitration clause survived termination of contract - Arbitration Act, 1980, s. 5 - (1995/6793 P - Morris J. - 9/11/95) - [1996] 1 I.R. 83

|Parkarran Ltd. v. M. & P. Construction Ltd.|

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Morris delivered the 9th day of November, 1995.

2 This is an application brought by the Defendants pursuant to Section 5 of the Arbitration Act, 1980seeking to have the Plaintiff's action against the Defendants stayed on the grounds that there is an agreement in existence between the parties that the matters in issue in the proceedings be referred to arbitration.

3 The circumstances in which the action and the application arises can be summarised as follows:-

4 The Plaintiff Company is engaged in the business of developing property and the Defendants are demolition contractors.

5 In January of 1995, the Plaintiff Company invited tenders to be submitted for a schedule of works for demolition and associated works to be carried out at the premises 27/30 Parliament Street and 2 Essex Gate, Dublin. The form of contract governing the tender was to be The Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland blue form where quantities do not form part of the contract. The completion date for the said works was to be the 30th March, 1995.

6 The Defendant Company by way of an original tender dated the 9th February, 1995 submitted to the Plaintiff a tender for the proposed work for the sum of £219,197.43 to be completed within six weeks from the date of possession of the premises. Certain variations took place in the amount of the consideration which are not relevant to the present application.

7 The Plaintiff alleges in an action which was brought against the Defendants arising out of this transaction that at all times the Defendants were informed that time was of the essence of the contract and that the work was to be completed on the 30th March, 1995 and it is alleged that the Defendants were informed that the commercial success of the entire development depended upon the Defendants performing its obligations strictly in accordance with this time limit and it is alleged that the Defendants undertook to complete the work before that date.

8 It is alleged by the Plaintiff that in breach of the obligation the Defendants failed to complete the work by the 30th March, 1995 and on the 18th May, 1995 the Plaintiffs served Notice upon the Defendants notifying them that in the event of its default in completing the work within ten working days from that date, the Plaintiff would terminate the Defendants" engagement. It is alleged that notwithstanding this Notice the Defendants failed to complete the work and consequently by Notice dated the 2nd June, 1995 the Plaintiffs terminated the Defendants" engagement.

9 The Plaintiff claims in this action that as a result of this breach of contract they suffered loss and damage and they make the claim...