CA 5 November 1986. Appeal against a cc decision on an issue arising between the appellants, the first defendants (site owners) and the third defendants, a firm of architects employed by them to sink a number of boreholes , as part of a soil survey requested by a prospective purchaser of the site. It was envisaged that the cost of this work would be included in the selling price of the land and would therefore be met indirectly by the purchaser. However, the cost of the boreholes was higher than expected and the purchase of the site did not go ahead. At all points during the negotiations the site owners made it clear to the architects that they would not meet the cost of drilling, despite having given the go ahead. The question before the cc was who should pay the costs and judgement was given against the site owners. CA held, dismissing the subsequent appeal, that the attempted disavowel of liability did not prevent the architects from having authority to act, which was clear from a