Woolworths Plc v Henry Boot Management Ltd & Anor

Woolworths Plc v Henry Boot Management Ltd & Anor

Although HBM owed Woolworths a duty of care to take reasonable steps to protect Store C from water ingress, the breach of duty found (failure to protect the Internal Wall from rainwater in Unit 21) was not causative of the adhesive failure. The overwhelming cause of the damage was water ingress from the unprotected screed edge at the shop front, for which HBM was not responsible. Therefore, Woolworths' claim fails for lack of causation.

Parties
Claimant: Woolworths plc; First Defendant: Henry Boot Management Limited; Second Defendant: Friends Provident Life Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil (tort/negligence, Construction) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Causation, Damages, Contributory Negligence, Contractual Warranty, Building Contracts
Tort Law Contract Law Construction Law Negligence Duty of Care Causation Damages Contributory Negligence +2 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woolworths plc

Claimant

Henry Boot Management Limited

First Defendant

Friends Provident Life Office

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (tort/negligence, Construction) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HBM owed and breached a duty of care to Woolworths regarding water ingress and floor damage in Store C
  2. 2 Whether HBM's breach, if any, caused the failure of the Amtico flooring adhesive
  3. 3 Whether Woolworths' losses were caused or contributed to by its own contractors' actions

Ratio Decidendi

Although HBM owed Woolworths a duty of care to take reasonable steps to protect Store C from water ingress, the breach of duty found (failure to protect the Internal Wall from rainwater in Unit 21) was not causative of the adhesive failure. The overwhelming cause of the damage was water ingress from the unprotected screed edge at the shop front, for which HBM was not responsible. Therefore, Woolworths' claim fails for lack of causation.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed