首页> 外文期刊>Building and construction law >KANE CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD v SOPOV (NO 3)
【24h】

KANE CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD v SOPOV (NO 3)

机译:凯恩建筑私人有限公司v SOPOV(NO 3)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

WARREN CJ: Judgments were previously delivered in this proceeding on 30 June 2005 ("the primary judgment") and 16 December 2005 ("the quantum judgment"). On 16 December 2005, I adjourned the proceeding to enable the parties to consider their responses to the judgments and potentially submit orders for consideration. It transpired that the parties were unable to agree on the form of orders. Hence, the matter returns to the Court for further argument. In the quantum judgment, I concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to its quantum meruit claim but, for the reasons stated, the matters of the delays, rectification and liquidated damages needed to be taken into account. I thereafter determined the quantum of amounts with respect to delays, liquidated damages, rectification and other claims, including variations and deduction variations and then interest. Finally, in the quantum judgment, I turned to the matter of whether the final orders should address amounts claimed and proved on an equitable set-off basis or a final balance approach. I determined the latter.
机译:沃伦·琼斯(WARREN CJ):先前已在此程序中于2005年6月30日(“主要判决”)和2005年12月16日(“量子判决”)作出判决。我于2005年12月16日中止了诉讼程序,使当事方能够考虑其对判决的答复,并有可能提交命令进行审议。事实证明,当事各方无法就命令的形式达成一致。因此,此事返回法院进一步辩论。在量子判决中,我得出结论,原告有权获得其量子案理索偿要求,但由于上述原因,需要考虑延误,纠正和违约赔偿等问题。此后,我确定了与延误,违约金,更正和其他索赔有关的金额,包括变化和扣除变化以及利息。最后,在定量判断中,我转向了最终订单应处理索偿金额并以公平抵销为基础还是以最终余额法证明的问题。我确定了后者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号