Smiffy99 Posted May 13, 2004 Report Share Posted May 13, 2004 Astea (UK) Ltd v Time Group Ltd [2003] EWHC 725 (TCC)(unreported). Under a contract signed in July 2000, Astea was to provide Time Group, a computer retailer, with a software package designed for their customer call centre. Due to delays on both sides, the integration and testing of the new software took longer than expected and Time withheld payment to Astea. Astea brought a claim against Time to recover these sums. Time argued in its defence that Astea had repudiated the contract by failing to complete the work by 6 March 2001.The judge, HHJ Seymour QC, found there was no express term to complete the work by 6 March 2001 and therefore, the implied term under s 14(1) of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 applied, where the supplier was to complete the work in a 'reasonable time'. Considering all the circumstances, including completion estimates given by Astea and the causes for delays, the judge found that Astea had not exceeded a reasonable time for performance. In any event, establishing repudiation on these grounds would be difficult. Most of the software integration had been done and Astea were more than willing to finish the work. Time had not lost 'substantially the whole benefit of the contract', the contract was not repudiated, and Time was ordered to pay. Well, lets hope they can afford it then....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.