000			01565cab a22002415a 4500
001			L137929
008			070508e20070503xxk f g 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u137929
041	0		_aeng
100	1		_aPatterson, Lindy
245	0	0	_aWhen should you sound the alarm?
260			_c2007
490		0	_aConstruction News _v(7016) 3 May 2007, 22(1)
520			_aExamines the extent to which contractors and designers are liable for each others deficient work. Notes that a duty to warn may be implied in a contractor's or designer's contract and highlights the case of "University of Glasgow v William Whitfield and another" ([1988] 42 BLR 66) where the architect argued that the contractor had such a duty to warn the employer. The architect's claim was rejected, but the judge stated that a duty may be implied if there is a reliance by the employer on the contractor. Also looks at "Lindenburg v Canning" ([1992] 62 BLR 142) where the court accepted the existence of a duty to warn, and "Hart v Fidler" ([2006] EWHC 2857 (TCC), L136020) where the court found that Fidler owed a duty to warn Hart of the danger posed to the permanent work.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aUNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW V WILLIAM WHITFIELD AND ANOTHER
650	2	4	_aLINDENBERG V CANNING
650	2	4	_aHART INVESTMENTS LTD V FIDLER AND ANOTHER
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
690			_aMANAGEMENT-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT-PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE-DUTY OF CARE-LIABILITY
942			_n0
999			_c78741 _d78741