Andrews v Schooling and others
Language: English Series: Construction Industry Law Letter ; 1991 CILL 675-676(2)Publication details: 1991Subject(s): Summary: CA 25 February 1991. From April to August 1986 the first two defendants S & C owned adjacent semi-detached houses. In August the freehold was transferred to the third defendant M a company of which S & C were directors and works to convert the houses into flats was undertaken through subcontractors. In 1987 M granted the plaintiff, A, a 199-year lease of one flat which included a cellar . It was found that the flat suffered from penetrating dampness emanating from the cellar on which no extensive work had been done. A sued S, C & M on three grounds; breach of duty under Defective Premises Act 1972 s1, common law negligence and misrepresentation arising out of a reply to a precontract inquiry. A fourth defendant, a surveyor was sued for negligence and breach of contract but this was dropped before the hearing. At the first hearing A was awarded interim payment of £7,500 as evidence was sufficient to establish liability under Defective Premises Act. The defendants appeal was dismissed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS44623 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 48063-1001 |
CA 25 February 1991. From April to August 1986 the first two defendants S & C owned adjacent semi-detached houses. In August the freehold was transferred to the third defendant M a company of which S & C were directors and works to convert the houses into flats was undertaken through subcontractors. In 1987 M granted the plaintiff, A, a 199-year lease of one flat which included a cellar . It was found that the flat suffered from penetrating dampness emanating from the cellar on which no extensive work had been done. A sued S, C & M on three grounds; breach of duty under Defective Premises Act 1972 s1, common law negligence and misrepresentation arising out of a reply to a precontract inquiry. A fourth defendant, a surveyor was sued for negligence and breach of contract but this was dropped before the hearing. At the first hearing A was awarded interim payment of £7,500 as evidence was sufficient to establish liability under Defective Premises Act. The defendants appeal was dismissed.