Hart Investments Ltd v Terence Maurice Charles Fidler (t/a Terence Fidler Partnership) & Anor

Hart Investments Ltd v Terence Maurice Charles Fidler (t/a Terence Fidler Partnership) & Anor

Mr Fidler was contractually and tortiously obliged to warn the contractor and take steps to prevent obvious and immediate danger to the permanent works when he observed dangerous excavations without propping on 3rd February 2004. His failure to do so was a breach of duty and caused the collapse and resulting economic loss.

Parties
Claimant: Hart Investments Limited; First Defendant: Terence Maurice Charles Fidler (T/A Terence Fidler Partnership); Second Defendant: Larchpark Limited (In Liquidation)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial of Liability
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant against the first defendant for damages to be assessed.
Legal Topics
Engineer’s Duty of Care, Liability for Building Collapse, Concurrent Liability in Contract and Tort, Economic Loss, Temporary Works Responsibility
Construction Law Contract Law Tort Law Professional Negligence Engineer’s Duty of Care Liability for Building Collapse Concurrent Liability in Contract and Tort Economic Loss +1 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hart Investments Limited

Claimant

Terence Maurice Charles Fidler (T/A Terence Fidler Partnership)

First Defendant

Larchpark Limited (In Liquidation)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Fidler was contractually responsible for the temporary works and propping scheme
  2. 2 Whether Mr Fidler owed a tortious duty of care to the claimant to prevent economic loss
  3. 3 Whether Mr Fidler designed and delivered an appropriate temporary propping scheme

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Fidler was contractually and tortiously obliged to warn the contractor and take steps to prevent obvious and immediate danger to the permanent works when he observed dangerous excavations without propping on 3rd February 2004. His failure to do so was a breach of duty and caused the collapse and resulting economic loss.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant against the first defendant for damages to be assessed.

Orders

  • Damages to be assessed in favour of the claimant as against Mr Fidler.