000			01399cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS67789
008			040604n2004 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u126418
100			_aBrewer, G.
245			_aRemoteness of damages
260			_c2004
490			_aContract Journal _v423(6471) 15 April 2004, 30(1)
520			_aDiscusses "Earls Terrace Properties Ltd v Nilsson Design Ltd and another" ([2004] EWHC 136 (TCC), [2004] All ER (D) 361), where the claimant (E) had engaged defendant (N) as the architect for refurbishment works to dwelling houses. When completion was delayed E brought proceedings to recover damages, contending the delay had led to the works financing arrangements being extended for 15 months. The time delay meant funds were unnecessarily tied up and unusable. Conversely, the property selling price had increased. It was held that the rise in the sale price did not need to be taken into account in assessing E's recoverable damages. Concludes that movements in the property market are too remote to be considered and should not be taken into account in assessing damages arising from completion delays.
590			_aABS
590			_aABS
650			_aEARLS TERRACE PROPERTIES LTD V NILSSON DESIGN LTD AND ANOTHER
650			_aDAMAGES
650			_aDELAY
650			_aCOMPLETION
690			_aBUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c117478 _d117478