Unliquidated damages meaning

Engenda Group Ltd v Petroineos Manufacturing Scotland Ltd [2024] CSOH 36 What are the practical implications of this case? This decision offers a notable application of the Court of Appeal judgment in Sudlows v Global Switch—delivered only after the two adjudications had been determined—and, more generally, a reaffirmation of the principles governing serial adjudication. It illustrates the practical limits on re-running disputes across successive adjudications, even where later authorities might be relied upon. Most strikingly, the employer here, having failed to prove the scale of its unliquidated damages in the first reference, was not allowed to cure that deficiency in a second reference addressing a pay less notice for the identical sum by deploying expert material that had not been advanced previously. In short, what was not proved the first time could not be shored up the second time by drafting in experts after the event. On this issue, the court distinguished Hitachi v John Sisk, where the claimant was permitted to adjudicate again on entitlement...

Sky UK Ltd and another company v Riverstone Managing Agency Ltd and other companies [2024] EWCA Civ 1567 What are the practical implications of this case? It is uncommon for coverage disputes under CAR policies to reach the Courts, as most are resolved through private arbitration. This ruling is especially welcome because it addresses a policy with a standard-form insurance clause, making it likely to have broad application. The standout finding relates to cover for damage emerging after the expiry of the policy. The judgment emphasises the value of reverting to first principles when grappling with complex legal issues. The central tenet is that an insurance policy is a contract of indemnity, under which the insurer undertakes that the insured peril will not materialise. If the insured event nevertheless occurs, the insurer is in breach of contract and must pay unliquidated damages for failing to hold the insured harmless. Where the insured event is property damage within a defined period, and it occurs, the unliquidated damages payable by...

This Practice Note reviews set-off provisions in leases and whether, following an assignment, a tenant may rely on a claim against an incoming landlord. A tenant may, at law, set off liquidated damages and, in equity, unliquidated damages for the landlord’s breach of covenant against rent falling due under the lease. In most leases, this ability to set off or make deductions is excluded by clear express terms. The Practice Note also examines whether a tenant can withhold rent or service charge where the landlord is in breach of the lease. A tenant is entitled: in certain circumstances at law, to set off liquidated sums; and in equity, to set off, including unliquidated damages for breach of covenant by the landlord, against rent accruing under the lease. However, the right to set off is commonly removed by express language. It is particularly important to use unambiguous drafting when excluding this right, to counter the presumption that neither party intends to give up remedies...

This Practice Note sets out the concept of liquidated and ascertained damages (LADs/LDs) and their role within building contracts. It explains how these provisions function and why they are used. Distinguishes liquidated from general (unliquidated) damages; Reviews enforceability and common challenges, including penalty arguments; Addresses setting the LADs figure, caps, and the dangers of stating “nil” or “N/A”; Refers to case summaries in a related case law Practice Note. What are liquidated damages? Where parties to a construction contract agree LADs, they pre-determine a fixed sum payable if a specified breach occurs. These provisions are also known as liquidated and ascertained damages, with the acronyms “LDs” and “LADs” used interchangeably. When liability for LADs arises, the amount is usually payable by the contractor to the employer, or the employer may deduct it from sums otherwise due to the contractor...

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Unforeseen ground conditions Subsurface or site conditions that could affect the works (whether on cost, timing, or programme) and were neither identified nor expected when the contract was made and agreed. They may require a change to how the works are undertaken and sequenced, call for remediation, or otherwise cause delay or disruption to the completion of the works. Unliquidated damages An alternative term for general damages. Such damages seek to return the wronged party to the position it would have been in had the breach of contract not occurred...