Pride Valley Foods Ltd v Hall and Partners (Contract Management) Ltd
Series: Construction Law Journal ; [2000] 16 Const.L.J. 6, 424-449(25)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: TCC 5 April 2000. Action by the claimant P against the defendant project managers for neligence, arising out of the loss of P's bakery. P alleged H had not fulfilled their duty of care to warn of potential fire hazards in the use of expanded polystyrene panels (ESP). P chose them because the panels were significantly cheaper than the material suggested by H. H conceded it was aware of the combustibility of ESP panels, but maintained that they had P appropriately and their advice was ignored. H had failed in their duty to advise P sufficiently of placing ovens next to ESP panels. However it was found P woud have disregarded that advice unless supported by a requirement from the planning or fire authorities, or his insurers. "Held" action dismissed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS63593 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 110880-1001 |
TCC 5 April 2000. Action by the claimant P against the defendant project managers for neligence, arising out of the loss of P's bakery. P alleged H had not fulfilled their duty of care to warn of potential fire hazards in the use of expanded polystyrene panels (ESP). P chose them because the panels were significantly cheaper than the material suggested by H. H conceded it was aware of the combustibility of ESP panels, but maintained that they had P appropriately and their advice was ignored. H had failed in their duty to advise P sufficiently of placing ovens next to ESP panels. However it was found P woud have disregarded that advice unless supported by a requirement from the planning or fire authorities, or his insurers. "Held" action dismissed.