← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case failure of basisunjust enrichmentremediesbreach

Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd

(2019) 267 CLR 560
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2019
StatusBinding authority

Summary

On termination of a building contract, a builder may recover reasonable value of work done in restitution, subject to the contract price as a ceiling where work was performed under a valid contract.

Key Principle

Restitution and quantum meruit after termination of building contract. Unjust enrichment operates as a unifying principle. Builder can recover reasonable value of work done.

Area of Law

contract

Related Cases

Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2016) 258 CLR 525

Bank late payment fees are not penalties where they represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss or protect a legitimate interest of the stipulating party.

Simic v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation (2016) 260 CLR 85

High Court of Australia examined the principles governing rectification of written contracts for common intention and unilateral mistake in equity.

Mount Bruce Mining Pty Ltd v Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 104

Contractual interpretation requires objective assessment of text, context and purpose simultaneously, without privileging any one element.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Mann v Paterson Constructions ...