Vainker & Anor v Marbank Construction Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 667 (TCC) (25 March 2024)

Vainker & Anor v Marbank Construction Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 667 (TCC) (25 March 2024)

The court found that Marbank was liable to Mrs Vainker for breach of contract for defective workmanship and to both claimants under the Defective Premises Act 1972 for defects rendering the property unfit for habitation at completion. SCd Architects' liability in contract was time-barred, but it owed a duty under the DPA 1972. The appropriate measure of damages was the reasonable cost of remedial works, as agreed by the claimants' and SCd's quantum experts, rejecting reliance on the abnormally low Etec tender. Minor or aesthetic defects were not compensable under the DPA. The court accepted the quantum figures agreed between the claimants' and SCd's experts, subject to liability findings...

Citation
[2024] EWHC 667 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Brenda Vainker; Claimant: Francois Vainker; First Defendant: Marbank Construction Limited; Second Defendant: Mercer & Miller (a firm); Third Defendant: SCd Architects Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Construction Defects / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; damages awarded to claimants for proven defects; counterclaim by Marbank dismissed except as set off for certified sums.
Legal Topics
Defective Premises Act 1972, Breach of Contract, Negligence, Limitation, Measure of Damages, Remedial Works, Quantum of Damages
Construction Law Contract Law Tort Law Statutory Duty Defective Premises Act 1972 Breach of Contract Negligence Limitation +3 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brenda Vainker

Claimant

Francois Vainker

Claimant

Marbank Construction Limited

First Defendant

Mercer & Miller (a firm)

Second Defendant

SCd Architects Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Construction Defects / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are liable for defects in the construction of a residential property under contract, tort, and the Defective Premises Act 1972
  2. 2 Whether the design and/or workmanship rendered the property unfit for habitation at completion
  3. 3 Whether claims are time-barred under contract or tort

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Marbank was liable to Mrs Vainker for breach of contract for defective workmanship and to both claimants under the Defective Premises Act 1972 for defects rendering the property unfit for habitation at completion. SCd Architects' liability in contract was time-barred, but it owed a duty under the DPA 1972. The appropriate measure of damages was the reasonable cost of remedial works, as agreed by the claimants' and SCd's quantum experts, rejecting reliance on the abnormally low Etec tender. Minor or aesthetic defects were not compensable under the DPA. The court accepted the quantum figures agreed between the claimants' and SCd's experts, subject to liability findings...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; damages awarded to claimants for proven defects; counterclaim by Marbank dismissed except as set off for certified sums.

Orders

  • Marbank to pay damages to Mrs Vainker for breach of contract and to both claimants under the Defective Premises Act 1972, quantum as per agreed expert figures.
  • SCd Architects liable under the Defective Premises Act 1972, quantum as per agreed expert figures, subject to net contribution clause.