''Sumpter v Hedges'' 8981 QB 673 is an

English contract law English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countrie ...

case, concerning substantial performance of a contract and

restitution The law of restitution is the law of gains-based recovery, in which a court orders the defendant to ''give up'' their gains to the claimant. It should be contrasted with the law of compensation, the law of loss-based recovery, in which a court ...

for

unjust enrichment In laws of equity, unjust enrichment occurs when one person is enriched at the expense of another in circumstances that the law sees as unjust. Where an individual is unjustly enriched, the law imposes an obligation upon the recipient to make res ...

Facts

Mr Sumpter was a builder. He had a contract to build two houses and stables for Mr Hedges for £560. He did work valued at £333 and said he had to stop because he had no more money. Substantial payments on account have in fact been made to the builder. Hedges finished the building, using materials which Sumpter had left behind. Sumpter sued for the outstanding money. Bruce J found that Mr Sumpter had abandoned the contract, and said he could obtain money for the value of the materials but nothing for the work.

Judgment

The Court of Appeal found that Mr Sumpter had abandoned the building work and emphasised that it left Mr Hedges without any choice of whether to adopt the work. It held that Mr Hedges had to pay for the building materials that he used, but did not need to reimburse Mr Sumpter for the half-built structures. AL Smith LJ gave the leading judgment: Chitty LJ concurred. Collins LJ concurred.

References

{{reflist, 2 English contract case law English unjust enrichment case law Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases 1898 in case law 1898 in British law

Facts

Judgment

See also

References