- Unexecuted JCT contract replaces letter of intent (Spartafield v Penten)
- Original news
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: The court held that the parties had concluded a construction contract, on the terms of the JCT Intermediate Contract with Contractor’s Design 2011 (ICD 2011), even though it had not been signed. The key terms had been agreed, and therefore the contract replaced an earlier binding letter of intent. The court also concluded that works carried out under the letter of intent had been governed by the ICD 2011 conditions, even though this was not expressly stated in the letter of intent.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial