Harrison & Ors v Shepherd Homes Ltd & Ors

Harrison & Ors v Shepherd Homes Ltd & Ors

SHL is liable to the claimants under the Defective Premises Act 1972, the Buildmark cover, and, for original purchasers, under the sales contracts, for defective foundations resulting in properties not being fit for habitation. The relevant contract terms do not exclude implied terms as to quality, skill, care, or fitness for habitation, and any attempt to do so would be unfair and unenforceable under the 1999 Regulations and UCTA. The appropriate measure of damages is diminution in value, not the cost of full remedial works, as reinstatement would be disproportionate. Modest damages for distress and inconvenience are also awarded.

Parties
Claimants: Mr Andrew Harrison and Others; First Defendant: Shepherd Homes Limited; Second Defendant: National House Building Council; Third Defendant: NHBC Building Control Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial of Lead Cases
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants on liability; damages awarded based on diminution in value and modest sums for distress and inconvenience; quantum for minor remedial works and external areas to be determined.
Legal Topics
Defective Premises, Implied Terms, Unfair Contract Terms, Measure of Damages, Consumer Contracts, Statutory Duties, Remedies for Defective Work, Limitation of Actions
Contract Law Tort Law Consumer Protection Construction Law Defective Premises Implied Terms Unfair Contract Terms Measure of Damages +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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Andrew Harrison and Others

Claimants

Shepherd Homes Limited

First Defendant

National House Building Council

Second Defendant

NHBC Building Control Services Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial of Lead Cases

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable for defective foundations under contract, the Defective Premises Act 1972, and the Buildmark cover; Whether certain contract terms exclude or limit liability; Whether the properties are unfit for habitation; The appropriate measure of damages for defective premises; The effect of entire agreement and merger clauses; The application of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

Ratio Decidendi

SHL is liable to the claimants under the Defective Premises Act 1972, the Buildmark cover, and, for original purchasers, under the sales contracts, for defective foundations resulting in properties not being fit for habitation. The relevant contract terms do not exclude implied terms as to quality, skill, care, or fitness for habitation, and any attempt to do so would be unfair and unenforceable under the 1999 Regulations and UCTA. The appropriate measure of damages is diminution in value, not the cost of full remedial works, as reinstatement would be disproportionate. Modest damages for distress and inconvenience are also awarded.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants on liability; damages awarded based on diminution in value and modest sums for distress and inconvenience; quantum for minor remedial works and external areas to be determined.

Orders

  • SHL to pay damages to each lead claimant as specified, subject to further determination of certain quantum issues.
  • Parties to draw up the necessary order and address ancillary matters following the judgment.