The defendants were engaged by the claimant to manufacture, deliver and install steel gates and gate arms for the construction of the Thames Barrier in London. The contract contained various milestone dates by which the defendants were to complete certain phases of the works. The claimant sought to argue that the defendants were under an additional obligation (in the form of an implied term) to proceed with the works generally with due diligence and expedition. The Court of Appeal held that the implication of such a term was not required to give business efficacy to the contract: rather, the defendants were under a duty only to proceed with the diligence that was required to satisfactorily meet the milestone dates and ultimate completion date of the works.
