Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
In relation to each of the two contracts I have referred to the respondent on behalf of the company executed a deed of release, by which both the employer and the company were released from future performance under the respective contract. But the employer was also released from liability in respect of any payment obligations which had by then accrued but which remained unpaid.
The Employer releases and discharges the Contractor from further performance of the Contractor’s obligations under the Building Contract
The Contractor releases and discharges the Employer from further performance of the Employer’s obligations under the Building Contract and from all claims and demands whatsoever arising out of or in respect of the Building Contract whether arising prior to on or subsequent to the date of this Deed
Nothing in this Deed shall operate to discharge the Contractor from any liability in respect of duties performed prior to the execution of this Deed”
The applicants allege that the entry into these deeds of release by the company at the instance of the respondent constituted a breach of his duties owed to the company, causing it losses of two distinct kinds. The first is the loss of the contract itself. The second was the loss of the right to any stage payments or retentions to which the company had by then become entitled.
Auto-extracted from The National Archives. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
[2026] EWHC 426 (Ch)
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.