Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn [2016] EWHC 40 (TCC) (15 January 2016)

Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn [2016] EWHC 40 (TCC) (15 January 2016)

The court held that no contract was concluded between the claimants and the defendant for the initial phase of the garden project, as there was no intention to create legal relations or consideration for the gratuitous services. However, the defendant, as a professional, assumed responsibility and owed a duty of care in tort to exercise reasonable skill and care in providing professional services, given the claimants' reasonable reliance. The nature and extent of the duty included design, project management, and cost advice. The court found that a budget of £130,000 was discussed between the parties before 5 July 2013.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 40 (TCC)
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
Preliminary issues determined: no contract for initial phase; duty of care in tort established; budget discussion found.
Legal Topics
Existence of Contract, Implied Terms, Duty of Care, Assumption of Responsibility, Gratuitous Services, Architectural Services, Project Management, Budget Representations
Contract Law Tort Law Professional Negligence Existence of Contract Implied Terms Duty of Care Assumption of Responsibility Gratuitous Services +3 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
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 Whether a contract was concluded between the claimants and the defendant and its terms
  2. 2 Whether the defendant owed a duty of care in tort to the claimants
  3. 3 Nature and extent of any such duty

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that no contract was concluded between the claimants and the defendant for the initial phase of the garden project, as there was no intention to create legal relations or consideration for the gratuitous services. However, the defendant, as a professional, assumed responsibility and owed a duty of care in tort to exercise reasonable skill and care in providing professional services, given the claimants' reasonable reliance. The nature and extent of the duty included design, project management, and cost advice. The court found that a budget of £130,000 was discussed between the parties before 5 July 2013.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined: no contract for initial phase; duty of care in tort established; budget discussion found.

Orders

  • Declaration that no contract was concluded for the initial phase of the garden project
  • Declaration that the defendant owed a duty of care in tort to the claimants