Sumpter v Hedges [1898] 1 QB 673

A builder enters into a contract to build a home for the value of approx. $600
$400 into the contract, he abandons the work
The client then finished building the home but didn’t pay the builder the $400.
The builder sued, saying the client freely accepted the work that he had already completed.

Can you have free acceptance of a building that must be finished to be usable following abandonment?

Smith LJ: There was no free acceptance, for what is an owner to do? He can’t leave it in an unfinished state forever
The builders cannot recover any of it because it was a lump sum contract and they didn’t do the work required
There was no fresh contract so couldn’t recover on quantum meruit
Chitty LJ: As above
Collins LJ: If you are to recover when you have abandoned the contract, the person must have freely accepted the work; they had no choice in this circumstance

This case is a demonstration of the principle that you can only recover part of a contract if the contract is not lump sum, and if the owner freely accepts the work. They cannot just have no choice.