INCONTROVERTIBLE BENEFIT, MISTAKE AND UNCONSCIONABILITY

JS Bloor Ltd v Pavillion Developments Ltd [2008] EWHC 724 (TCC), [2008] All ER (D) 381 (Apr)

In JS Bloor Ltd v Pavillion Developments Ltd [2008] EWHC 724 (TCC), [2008] All ER (D) 381 (Apr) the claimant contractor claimed payment in respect of work it had done which it alleged had resulted in the unjust enrichment of the defendant. Judge Kirkham held that the claimant was not entitled to succeed in its claim because it had not been able to establish that the defendant had acted unconscionably. She also held that the defendant had not been incontrovertibly benefited as a result of the work which the claimant had done. While the work had in one sense resulted in a benefit to the defendant, it was also the case that it had created a number of disadvantages for the defendant. The disadvantages to the defendant were significant and, this being the case, any benefit to them could not be said to be ‘incontrovertible’.