Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC) (30 January 2019)

Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC) (30 January 2019)

Zagora failed against ZIP because there was no legally binding agreement to rectify and Zagora was not an insured under the building warranty. The individual leaseholder claimants succeeded against ZIP/EWIC as the defects fell within policy cover, but recovery was limited to the aggregate purchase prices of their flats due to policy limits. Claims against ZBC failed because, although ZBC acted negligently and made untrue representations, the requisite reliance and intention for deceit were not established.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 140 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Zagora Management Limited & Others; First Defendant: Zurich Insurance plc; Second Defendant: Zurich Building Control Services Limited; Third Defendant: East West Insurance Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Technology and Construction Court / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Partially allowed
Legal Topics
Building Warranties, Professional Negligence, Deceit, Limitation of Liability, Interpretation of Insurance Policies, Building Regulations Compliance, Remedial Works, Damages Quantification
Insurance Law Construction Law Contract Law Tort Law Building Warranties Professional Negligence Deceit Limitation of Liability +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zagora Management Limited & Others

Claimant

Zurich Insurance plc

First Defendant

Zurich Building Control Services Limited

Second Defendant

East West Insurance Company Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Technology and Construction Court / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Zagora had a binding agreement to rectify with ZIP
  2. 2 Whether Zagora was an insured under the building warranty
  3. 3 Whether the individual leaseholder claimants are entitled to recover under the building warranties

Ratio Decidendi

Zagora failed against ZIP because there was no legally binding agreement to rectify and Zagora was not an insured under the building warranty. The individual leaseholder claimants succeeded against ZIP/EWIC as the defects fell within policy cover, but recovery was limited to the aggregate purchase prices of their flats due to policy limits. Claims against ZBC failed because, although ZBC acted negligently and made untrue representations, the requisite reliance and intention for deceit were not established.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed

Orders

  • Zagora's claims against ZIP dismissed
  • Individual leaseholder claimants' claims against ZIP/EWIC allowed, limited to £3,634,074 (aggregate purchase prices)