Howard de Walden Estates Ltd v Costain Management Design Ltd
Language: English Series: Construction Industry Law Letter ; (1991) CILL 713-714(2)Publication details: 1991Subject(s): Summary: ORC 11 July 1991. Following the collapse of a wall during a subcontractor`s underpinning operations, it was discovered that the specification had not been followed, but also agreed that had it been observed, the damage would still have occured. The contractor duly carried out remedial work under architects` instructions, and dispute arose over who would bear the cost. At arbitration, and in the light of the Simplex case, C was seen to be entitled to be paid the costs incurred by the instructions. H appealed and the court reversed the decision, as the instructions were issued after a breach of contract by C, which had no parallel in Simplex. The judgement makes clear that instructions alone do not entitle the contractor to payment for work necessary to comply with those instructions.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS45699 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 54594-1001 |
ORC 11 July 1991. Following the collapse of a wall during a subcontractor`s underpinning operations, it was discovered that the specification had not been followed, but also agreed that had it been observed, the damage would still have occured. The contractor duly carried out remedial work under architects` instructions, and dispute arose over who would bear the cost. At arbitration, and in the light of the Simplex case, C was seen to be entitled to be paid the costs incurred by the instructions. H appealed and the court reversed the decision, as the instructions were issued after a breach of contract by C, which had no parallel in Simplex. The judgement makes clear that instructions alone do not entitle the contractor to payment for work necessary to comply with those instructions.