000			01980cad a22002055a 4500
001			L139945
008			070822e20070221xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u139945
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aIan McGlinn v Waltham Contractors Ltd and Huw Thomas Associates and DJ Hartigan and Associates Ltd and Wilson Large and Partners (No 3) _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[2007] EWHC 149 (TCC), 21 February 2007. Claimant (M) brought proceedings for damages for breach of contract and/or negligence against the defendant building contractors (Watham), the architects (H), the engineers (D) and the quantity surveyors and so called project managers (WL). Following the completion of M's private residence, M had decided that the house was so badly designed and so badly built that he was entitled to demolish it and start again. M claimed he was entitled to damages by way of the actual cost of demolition and the estimated cost of rebuilding. M also submitted the defendants had carried out inadequate inspections. The defendants argued that M's decision to demolish the property was unreasonable and that damages should be based on the cost of the work necessary to repair the individual defects for which each defendant was liable. "Held": M was only entitled to damages for the cost of repair, rather than the costs of demolition and rebuilding, because the defects were aesthetic rather than structural and M had not acted reasonably in demolishing the building. See full judgment for decisions against each defendant.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aMCGLINN V WALTHAM CONTRACTORS LTD AND OTHERS
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
690			_aMANAGEMENT-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT-PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE-NEGLIGENCE
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2007/149.html _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c79141 _d79141