Midland Bank plc v Bardgrove Property Services Ltd and others
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1992) 37 EG 126-133(7)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: CA 18 June 1992. Excavations at an adjoining development site caused subsidence and damage to M`s property, although B had arranged for shoring and later erected a retaining wall. This latter was taken, during litigation, to be inadequate. Meanwhile M rectified the damage at their own expense but subseqently sued B. Having lost at the first trial, M appealed to establish whether damage as a basis for tort had to be actual, or a future potential. The respondents` defence, however, was allowed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS47034 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 60492-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
CA 18 June 1992. Excavations at an adjoining development site caused subsidence and damage to M`s property, although B had arranged for shoring and later erected a retaining wall. This latter was taken, during litigation, to be inadequate. Meanwhile M rectified the damage at their own expense but subseqently sued B. Having lost at the first trial, M appealed to establish whether damage as a basis for tort had to be actual, or a future potential. The respondents` defence, however, was allowed.