CDM design fault under the spotlight
Series: Construction News ; (6666) 18 May 2000, 12(1)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the flaws in the CDM Regulations which have come to light following the case "R v Paul Wurth SA". This case held that a designer cannot be held responsible for a design which it has arranged for a third party to prepare, even if it has approved and adapted the design.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS62282 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 106067-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Discusses the flaws in the CDM Regulations which have come to light following the case "R v Paul Wurth SA". This case held that a designer cannot be held responsible for a design which it has arranged for a third party to prepare, even if it has approved and adapted the design.