Remoteness of damages
Series: Contract Journal ; 423(6471) 15 April 2004, 30(1)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Summary: Discusses "Earls Terrace Properties Ltd v Nilsson Design Ltd and another" ([2004] EWHC 136 (TCC), [2004] All ER (D) 361), where the claimant (E) had engaged defendant (N) as the architect for refurbishment works to dwelling houses. When completion was delayed E brought proceedings to recover damages, contending the delay had led to the works financing arrangements being extended for 15 months. The time delay meant funds were unnecessarily tied up and unusable. Conversely, the property selling price had increased. It was held that the rise in the sale price did not need to be taken into account in assessing E's recoverable damages. Concludes that movements in the property market are too remote to be considered and should not be taken into account in assessing damages arising from completion delays.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS67789 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 126418-1001 |
Discusses "Earls Terrace Properties Ltd v Nilsson Design Ltd and another" ([2004] EWHC 136 (TCC), [2004] All ER (D) 361), where the claimant (E) had engaged defendant (N) as the architect for refurbishment works to dwelling houses. When completion was delayed E brought proceedings to recover damages, contending the delay had led to the works financing arrangements being extended for 15 months. The time delay meant funds were unnecessarily tied up and unusable. Conversely, the property selling price had increased. It was held that the rise in the sale price did not need to be taken into account in assessing E's recoverable damages. Concludes that movements in the property market are too remote to be considered and should not be taken into account in assessing damages arising from completion delays.