³ÉÈËÓ°Òô

Legal News

No reliance on advice meant that claim for damages for negligence failed (Darcliffe Homes v Glanville Consultants)

Published on: 13 December 2024

Table of contents

  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Breach of duty
  • Insufficient nexus between element of harm and the duty of care—No reliance/causation
  • No loss
  • Case details

Article summary

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) dismissed a claim for damages for professional negligence by a property developer against a consultant engineer after finding that the engineer had failed to act with reasonable skill and care, because the property developer had not relied on the advice given and would not have done anything differently had non-negligent advice been given. The court held that the property developer had failed to establish a sufficient nexus between a particular element of the harm for which it sought damages and the subject matter of the engineering company’s duty of care.

Popular documents