Dry rot claim succeeds
Language: English Series: EGCS ; (1988) 97Publication details: 1988Subject(s): Summary: In Ackerman and Another v Protim Services Ltd and Another CA 24 June 1988 the plaintiffs` claim against Protim for breach of guarantee was upheld on the grounds that an outbreak of dry rot was reactivated by a damp inner-wall face and as the wall was not as such defective, the infestation was not "as a result" of any failure by the plaintiffs to keep the property waterproof.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2427-14 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 59093-1001 |
In Ackerman and Another v Protim Services Ltd and Another CA 24 June 1988 the plaintiffs` claim against Protim for breach of guarantee was upheld on the grounds that an outbreak of dry rot was reactivated by a damp inner-wall face and as the wall was not as such defective, the infestation was not "as a result" of any failure by the plaintiffs to keep the property waterproof.