Harrison & Ors v Technical Sign Company Ltd & Ors
Cluttons did not owe a duty of care to either the claimants or Maison Blanc due to lack of proximity and assumption of responsibility; therefore, Active's claim for contribution fails and the appeal is allowed.
- Parties
- Claimants: Gillian Harrison and Others; Defendants: Technical Sign Company Ltd and Others; Part 20 Claimant/respondent: Active Commercial Interiors Ltd; Part 20 Defendant/appellant: Cluttons LLP
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 04 December 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; Active's claim for contribution against Cluttons fails.
- Legal Topics
- Duty of Care, Contribution, Negligence, Proximity, Assumption of Responsibility
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gillian Harrison and Others
Claimants
Technical Sign Company Ltd and Others
Defendants
Active Commercial Interiors Ltd
Part 20 Claimant/respondent
Cluttons LLP
Part 20 Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Cluttons owed a duty of care to the claimants (members of the public)
- 2 Whether Cluttons owed a duty of care to Maison Blanc
- 3 Whether Cluttons was negligent
Ratio Decidendi
Cluttons did not owe a duty of care to either the claimants or Maison Blanc due to lack of proximity and assumption of responsibility; therefore, Active's claim for contribution fails and the appeal is allowed.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; Active's claim for contribution against Cluttons fails.
Orders
- Appeal allowed
- Active's claim for contribution dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment