Lendlease Construction (Europe) Limited v Aecom Limited

Lendlease Construction (Europe) Limited v Aecom Limited

Lendlease’s claims are statute-barred because the Consultancy Agreement was executed as a deed, but all relevant causes of action accrued more than 12 years before proceedings commenced. Alternatively, the Settlement Agreement precludes claims for defects known or reasonably knowable at the time. Aecom’s duty was to exercise reasonable skill, care, and diligence, not to guarantee outcomes or step down all of Lendlease’s obligations. There was no continuing duty to review or warn after construction. Even if liability were established, Lendlease failed to prove causation and quantum for most defects, and failed to show the reasonableness of settlement sums for others.

Parties
Claimant: Lendlease Construction (Europe) Limited; Defendant: AECOM Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction Dispute) / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Breach of Contract, Design Responsibility, Settlement Agreements, Indemnity Claims
Construction Law Contract Law Professional Negligence Limitation of Actions Breach of Contract Design Responsibility Settlement Agreements Indemnity Claims

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lendlease Construction (Europe) Limited

Claimant

AECOM Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction Dispute) / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Aecom was in breach of its contractual obligations under the Consultancy Agreement for design and fire safety strategy for the Oncology Centre at St James’s University Hospital, Leeds.
  2. 2 Whether Lendlease’s claims are statute-barred under the applicable limitation period.
  3. 3 Whether the Settlement Agreement between Lendlease and Aecom precludes the current claims.

Ratio Decidendi

Lendlease’s claims are statute-barred because the Consultancy Agreement was executed as a deed, but all relevant causes of action accrued more than 12 years before proceedings commenced. Alternatively, the Settlement Agreement precludes claims for defects known or reasonably knowable at the time. Aecom’s duty was to exercise reasonable skill, care, and diligence, not to guarantee outcomes or step down all of Lendlease’s obligations. There was no continuing duty to review or warn after construction. Even if liability were established, Lendlease failed to prove causation and quantum for most defects, and failed to show the reasonableness of settlement sums for others.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim by Lendlease Construction (Europe) Limited against Aecom Limited is dismissed in its entirety.