000			01512cab a2200205 4500
001			ABS39891
008			090401t1988 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u19852
041			_aeng
245			_aMarder and another v Sautelle and Hicks
260			_c1988
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(8841) 15 October 1988, 87-90(3)
520			_aCA 4 May 1988. Appeal by firm of surveyors (S) against cc decision in favour of purchasers (M) of a bungalow . S had carried out a survey on the bungalow but failed to detect that the outer walls were built of blocks of cement and aggregate, the latter consisting of either mine waste or mundic, a material known to crumble. A few years later the defective walls were discovered and M raised an action against S alleging negligence. CC rejected S`s submission that repair was possible and held S liable in negligence, awarding M damages of £19,500, being the difference between the value of the house in a sound condition in 1979 at £33,000 and the site value minus demolition costs of £13,500. Shortly after the trial M sold the bungalow for £70,000. On learning this, S sought leave to appeal out of time, and for leave to adduce fresh evidence. S contended that the price obtained so soon after the trial was relevant in that it doubted the whole basis of the CC award. S also wanted to adduce f
650			_aBUILDING DEFECTS
650			_aSOUTH WEST
690			_aPROFESSIONAL PRACTICE-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c13298 _d13298