Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn

Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn

No contract was concluded between the parties due to lack of offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations. However, the Defendant owed a duty of care in tort to the Claimants, having assumed responsibility for professional services as architect and project manager, and the Claimants relied on her skill and expertise. The scope of duty included selection and procurement of contractors, preparation of designs for pricing, periodic inspection (supervision), advice on payments, cost control, and detailed design, subject to qualifications regarding specialist engineering expertise.

Parties
Claimant: Peter Burgess; Claimant: Lynn Burgess; Defendant: Basia Lejonvarn
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Claim in contract dismissed; claim in tort proceeds.
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Assumption of Responsibility, Contract Formation, Economic Loss, Project Management, Architectural Services
Professional Negligence Tort Law Contract Law Duty of Care Assumption of Responsibility Contract Formation Economic Loss Project Management +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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Burgess

Claimant

Lynn Burgess

Claimant

Basia Lejonvarn

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was a contract concluded between the Claimants and the Defendant?
  2. 2 Did the Defendant owe a duty of care in tort to the Claimants?
  3. 3 What was the nature and extent of any duty owed?

Ratio Decidendi

No contract was concluded between the parties due to lack of offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations. However, the Defendant owed a duty of care in tort to the Claimants, having assumed responsibility for professional services as architect and project manager, and the Claimants relied on her skill and expertise. The scope of duty included selection and procurement of contractors, preparation of designs for pricing, periodic inspection (supervision), advice on payments, cost control, and detailed design, subject to qualifications regarding specialist engineering expertise.

Court Disposition

Claim in contract dismissed; claim in tort proceeds.

Orders

  • No contract found between Claimants and Defendant.
  • Defendant owed a duty of care in tort to Claimants for professional services as architect and project manager.