What price defects? (Record no. 72375)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 01878cam a2200229 4500 |
| 001 - CONTROL NUMBER | |
| control field | ABS66514 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 030328n2003 000 0 eng u |
| 035 ## - SYSTEM CONTROL NUMBER | |
| System control number | (Sirsi) u121778 |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Knowles, R. |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | What price defects? |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2003 |
| 490 ## - SERIES STATEMENT | |
| Series statement | Building Engineer |
| Volume/sequential designation | 78(3) March 2003, 36(1) |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | Examines whether a contractor should be given the option of putting faulty work right or pay the cost of others doing the work. However, this situation can often lead to a dispute as the contractor can argue that a fault is not preventing use of a facility and that an owner is seeking to make a profit from a situation. "Ruxley Electronics v Forsyth" (HL Abs53197) ruled the contractor should only pay £2 500 for loss of amenity rather than £21 560 claimed, when he failed to construct a swimming pool to the specified depth, the difference only being nine inches. "McLaren Murdoch and Hamilton Ltd v The Abercromby Motor Group Ltd" (CSOH 2002) dealt with a dispute where an previously installed underfloor heating system in a car motor showroom and workshop was deemed inadequate, and the owner sought to reclaim the cost of replacing it. The architect was ordered to pay the whole cost of the error. The two cases have differing outcomes as Forsyth could still use the pool, whereas Abercromby could not arguably use a cold showroom. |
| 590 ## - LOCAL NOTE (RLIN) | |
| Local note | ABS |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | LOSS OF AMENITY |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | RUXLEY ELECTRONICS AND CONSTRUCTION LTD V FORSYTH |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | MCLAREN MURDOCH AND HAMILTON LTD V ABERCROMBY MOTOR GROUP LTD |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | DEFECTIVE WORK |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | MANGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION |
| 856 ## - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS | |
| Uniform Resource Identifier | <a href="https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinionsv/ca128_00.html">https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinionsv/ca128_00.html</a> |
| Public note | View "McLaren Murdoch and Hamilton Ltd v Abercromby Motor Group at the Scottish Court website. |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Suppress in OPAC | 0 |
| Withdrawn status | Lost status | Source of classification or shelving scheme | Damaged status | Not for loan | Home library | Current library | Shelving location | Date acquired | Total Checkouts | Full call number | Barcode | Date last seen | Copy number | Price effective from | Koha item type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dewey Decimal Classification | London | London | Journal article | 28/03/2003 | ABS66514 | 121778-1001 | 06/08/2019 | 1 | 06/08/2019 | Journal article |