Sandhu Menswear Company Ltd v Woolworths plc
Language: English Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2006] EWHC 1299 (TCC), 5 June 2006. Concerns an action for damages brought by S regarding an arson attack outside a warehousing unit shared by S and W. Arsonists set fire to combustible waste left outside by W in breach of its lease; the fire damaged the contents of S's unit. S claimed a breach of duty on the part of W. "Held": W were liable in damages to S. The estate had a history of vandalism, so the likelihood of an arson attack was foreseeable, and W failed to comply with its own fire safety policy. W knew of the risk of leaving inflammable waste outside overnight and owed S a duty of care as established in "Smith v Littlewoods" (HL, Abs37446).| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 133968-1001 |
[2006] EWHC 1299 (TCC), 5 June 2006. Concerns an action for damages brought by S regarding an arson attack outside a warehousing unit shared by S and W. Arsonists set fire to combustible waste left outside by W in breach of its lease; the fire damaged the contents of S's unit. S claimed a breach of duty on the part of W. "Held": W were liable in damages to S. The estate had a history of vandalism, so the likelihood of an arson attack was foreseeable, and W failed to comply with its own fire safety policy. W knew of the risk of leaving inflammable waste outside overnight and owed S a duty of care as established in "Smith v Littlewoods" (HL, Abs37446).