You can run...
Language: English Series: Building ; 271(8418) 17 February 2006, 55(1)Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Summary: Gives the facts of, and comments upon, Baker and Davies plc v Leslie Wilks Associates ([2005] EWHC 1179 (TCC) [2005] BLC 425), where a claim was made by a contractor against an engineer under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978. The engineer's argument that the time limit for a claim for contribution had expired was rejected by the court. The author argues that if it had been upheld, the effect would be that a non-binding arrangement in the main action, which fell through after two years, would prevent contribution proceedings being brought, which was clearly not the intention of parliament when the Limitation Act 1980 was passed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L132591 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 132591-1001 |
Gives the facts of, and comments upon, Baker and Davies plc v Leslie Wilks Associates ([2005] EWHC 1179 (TCC) [2005] BLC 425), where a claim was made by a contractor against an engineer under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978. The engineer's argument that the time limit for a claim for contribution had expired was rejected by the court. The author argues that if it had been upheld, the effect would be that a non-binding arrangement in the main action, which fell through after two years, would prevent contribution proceedings being brought, which was clearly not the intention of parliament when the Limitation Act 1980 was passed.