Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
JURITEXT000007075134 Généré par l'IA

Contractor Termination Damages Calculation Upheld

Numéro de cause JURITEXT000007075134
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction France (FR)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

An owner contracted with a general contractor for the construction of a house, but the contractor unilaterally terminated the agreement due to a dispute over the necessity of special foundations. The owner subsequently sued for damages, and the appellate court awarded an indemnity based on the difference between the original contract price and the increased cost of the same construction three years later. The contractor appealed, arguing that the indemnity was improper because the damage was not certain, as the house had not been built, thus violating the civil code concerning damages. The high court rejected the appeal, finding that the appellate court had the sovereign authority to determine the nature and amount of the compensation.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

ARTICLE 1147 DU CODE CIVIL, REJETTE LE POURVOI; Contractor Termination Damages Calculation Upheld: The owner subsequently sued for damages, and the appellate court awarded an indemnity based on the difference between the original contract price and the increased cost of the same construction three years later. The contractor appealed, arguing that the indemnity was improper because the damage was not certain, as the house had not been built, thus violating the civil code concerning damages. The high court rejected the appeal, finding that the appellate court had the sovereign authority to determine the nature and amount of the compensation.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
contrat de construction calcul du dommage convention de rupture marché différentiel contestation civile nullité du contrat

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
ARTICLE 1147 DU CODE CIVIL
The appellant claimed the lower court violated this article by considering a speculative damage, but the court rejected this argument, implying the application was correct or that the appeal point based on it was unfounded.
REJETTE LE POURVOI
This is the operative order disposing of the appeal.
Généré par l'IA
22-14173
Contractor Termination Dispute and Damages Calculation
15-22242
Construction Contract Termination Damages Upheld
23-23942
Contractor Termination Damages Based on Contract Type
92-17045
Owner v. Contractor: Contract Termination and Damages Allocation
07-18204
Construction Contract Termination and Damages Dispute

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
ARTICLE 1147 DU CODE CIVIL

The appellant claimed the lower court violated this article by considering a speculative damage, but the court rejected this argument, implying the application was correct or that the appeal point based on it was unfounded.

REJETTE LE POURVOI

This is the operative order disposing of the appeal.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

SUR LE MOYEN UNIQUE : ATTENDU, SELON L'ARRET ATTAQUE (PARIS, 13 NOVEMBRE 1980) QUE M Z... AYANT CONFIE A M X..., ENTREPRENEUR GENERAL, LA CONSTRUCTION D'UN PAVILLON SUR UN TERRAIN DONT IL ETAIT PROPRIETAIRE, L'ENTREPRENEUR, EN DESACCORD AVEC LE MAITRE DE Y... SUR LA NECESSITE DE FONDATIONS SPECIALES, ROMPIT UNILATERALEMENT LE MARCHE ;

ATTENDU QUE M X... FAIT GRIEF A L'ARRET DE L'AVOIR CONDAMNE A PYER A M Z... UNE INDEMNITE BASEE SUR LA DIFFERENCE ENTRE LE PRIX CONVENU AU MARCHE ET CELUI DE LA MEME CONSTRUCTION TROIS ANS PLUS TARD, ALORS, SELON LE MOYEN, "QUE SEUL PEUT DONNER LIEU A REPARATION UN DOMMAGE CERTAIN ;

D'OU IL SUIT QUE LA COUR D'APPEL QUI TIENT COMPTE, POUR FIXER L'INDEMNITE, DU PREJUDICE RESULTANT DE LA VARIATION DU COUT DE CONSTRUCTION D'UN PAVILLON DONT ELLE CONSTATE QU'IL N'A PAS A ETRE CONSTRUIT, A VIOLE L'ARTICLE 1147 DU CODE CIVIL ;

" MAIS ATTENDU QUE LA COUR D'APPEL A SOUVERAINMENT FIXE LES MODALITES ET LE MONTANT DE LA REPARATION ;

D'OU IL SUIT QUE LE MOYEN N'EST PAS FONDE ;

PAR CES MOTIFS : REJETTE LE POURVOI FORME CONTRE L'ARRET RENDU LE 13 NOVEMBRE 1980 PAR LA COUR D'APPEL DE PARIS ;