Harrison & Ors v Technical Sign Company Ltd & Ors

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

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

  1. 1 Whether Cluttons owed a duty of care to the claimants (members of the public)
  2. 2 Whether Cluttons owed a duty of care to Maison Blanc
  3. 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