Lambert & Ors v Barratt Homes Ltd & Anor

Lambert & Ors v Barratt Homes Ltd & Anor

Rochdale's measured duty of care did not extend to carrying out or paying for the relief works, as the flooding was caused by Barratt's obstruction and the duty was limited to cooperation and facilitation. The trial judge erred in imposing a broader duty. Liability in nuisance for artificial concentration of water was not established against Rochdale, as the cause was Barratt's blockage, not Rochdale's actions.

Parties
Claimants/respondents: Lambert and Others; First Defendant/appellant: Barratt Homes Limited; Second Defendant/appellant: Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Appeal allowed; trial judge's finding of liability against Rochdale set aside; claim not formally dismissed but remitted for possible further determination.
Legal Topics
Measured Duty of Care, Liability for Flooding, Nuisance Abatement, Scope of Duty in Nuisance, Artificial Versus Natural Causes
Tort Law Nuisance Negligence Measured Duty of Care Liability for Flooding Nuisance Abatement Scope of Duty in Nuisance Artificial Versus Natural Causes

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lambert and Others

Claimants/respondents

Barratt Homes Limited

First Defendant/appellant

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council

Second Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rochdale owed a measured duty of care to abate nuisance caused by flooding originating from its land
  2. 2 Whether the duty extended to carrying out and paying for relief works
  3. 3 Whether liability in nuisance attached to Rochdale for concentrated flow of water via artificial means

Ratio Decidendi

Rochdale's measured duty of care did not extend to carrying out or paying for the relief works, as the flooding was caused by Barratt's obstruction and the duty was limited to cooperation and facilitation. The trial judge erred in imposing a broader duty. Liability in nuisance for artificial concentration of water was not established against Rochdale, as the cause was Barratt's blockage, not Rochdale's actions.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; trial judge's finding of liability against Rochdale set aside; claim not formally dismissed but remitted for possible further determination.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Claim against Rochdale not formally dismissed but remitted for possible further determination of scope and breach of duty