000			01421cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS40236
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u22415
041			_aeng
245			_aNorwich City Council v Harvey
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aNew Law Journal _v139(6390) 13 January 1989, 40-41(2)
520			_aCA 21 December 1988. The employer, (the building owners), entered into a JCT contract with the main contractors for an extension to a swimming pool . There was a clause within the contract which stated that the employer was solely liable with regard to any loss or damage to the premises by fire . Some work on the roof was contracted to subcontractors, one of whose employees set fire to the buildings and extension with a blow torch. The owners brought an action claiming negligence against the subcontractors and their employee. The claim was dismissed and the employer appealed. The CA dismissed the employer`s appeal, stating that although no contract existed between the employer and the subcontractor, the subcontractor was entitled to rely on the provision of the main contract which stated that the building owner was to bear the risk of loss or damage caused by fire, even if this damage was caused by the negligence of the subcontractor.
650			_aLIABILITY
690			_aBUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c15016 _d15016