File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: MANN V PATERSON CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD: THE INTERSECTION OF DEBT, DAMAGES AND QUANTUM MERUIT

TitleMANN V PATERSON CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD: THE INTERSECTION OF DEBT, DAMAGES AND QUANTUM MERUIT
Authors
Issue Date2021
Citation
Melbourne University Law Review, 2021, v. 44, n. 2, p. 679-724 How to Cite?
AbstractThe High Court’s decision in Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd (2019) 267 CLR 560 raised several fundamental questions of legal principle regarding the relationship between the law of contract and the law of restitution in Australia. Many important propositions emerge from the case. Perhaps the most controversial is that where a contract for the performance of work is brought to a premature end following a repudiation by the party who contracted for that work, the (innocent) partial performer of work for which no unconditional right to payment has accrued is entitled to recover non-contractual quantum meruit in the alternative to claiming damages for the lost bargain. This article defends this holding as well as the usual imposition of a ‘contractual ceiling’ on the measure of non-contractual quantum meruit claims.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/354323
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 0.8
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.212

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWinterton, David-
dc.contributor.authorPilkington, Timothy-
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-07T08:47:54Z-
dc.date.available2025-02-07T08:47:54Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationMelbourne University Law Review, 2021, v. 44, n. 2, p. 679-724-
dc.identifier.issn0025-8938-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/354323-
dc.description.abstractThe High Court’s decision in Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd (2019) 267 CLR 560 raised several fundamental questions of legal principle regarding the relationship between the law of contract and the law of restitution in Australia. Many important propositions emerge from the case. Perhaps the most controversial is that where a contract for the performance of work is brought to a premature end following a repudiation by the party who contracted for that work, the (innocent) partial performer of work for which no unconditional right to payment has accrued is entitled to recover non-contractual quantum meruit in the alternative to claiming damages for the lost bargain. This article defends this holding as well as the usual imposition of a ‘contractual ceiling’ on the measure of non-contractual quantum meruit claims.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofMelbourne University Law Review-
dc.titleMANN V PATERSON CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD: THE INTERSECTION OF DEBT, DAMAGES AND QUANTUM MERUIT-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85188840484-
dc.identifier.volume44-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage679-
dc.identifier.epage724-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats