Offer-Hoar & Ors v Larkstore Ltd & Ors

Offer-Hoar & Ors v Larkstore Ltd & Ors

Larkstore's assignment from Starglade is valid as Larkstore had a genuine commercial interest in enforcing the claim. Larkstore can recover for breach of contract only, not in tort, as damage occurred after the transfer and no tortious cause of action was assignable. Technotrade owed a duty of care to the neighbouring property owners for physical damage but not to Larkstore for economic loss. Technotrade did not owe a duty of care to Larkstore for economic loss because there was insufficient proximity and foreseeability; the duty did not extend to an indeterminate class of future developers.

Parties
Claimant: Gordon Offer-Hoar; Claimant: Mrs Offer-Hoar; Claimant: Mrs Ann P Henderson; Claimant: Michael Guy; Claimant: Mary Guy; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Larkstore Limited; Defendant: Bess Limited; Part 20 Defendant: Technotrade Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil / Determination of Preliminary Issues After Pleadings and Submissions
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined as follows: Larkstore can recover for breach of contract under the assignment; Technotrade owed a duty of care to the Claimants for physical damage; Technotrade owed Larkstore a duty of care only in relation to physical damage to adjoining property, not for economic loss.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Choses in Action, Duty of Care, Economic Loss, Physical Damage, Contribution and Indemnity, Planning Permission Conditions, Champerty and Maintenance
Contract Law Tort Law Property Law Professional Negligence Assignment of Choses in Action Duty of Care Economic Loss Physical Damage +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 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gordon Offer-Hoar

Claimant

Mrs Offer-Hoar

Claimant

Mrs Ann P Henderson

Claimant

Michael Guy

Claimant

Mary Guy

Claimant

Larkstore Limited

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Bess Limited

Defendant

Technotrade Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Determination of Preliminary Issues After Pleadings and Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Larkstore can recover loss by operation of the assignment from Starglade
  2. 2 Whether Technotrade owed a duty of care to the Claimants (neighbouring property owners)
  3. 3 Whether Technotrade owed Larkstore a duty of care for economic loss and/or physical damage

Ratio Decidendi

Larkstore's assignment from Starglade is valid as Larkstore had a genuine commercial interest in enforcing the claim. Larkstore can recover for breach of contract only, not in tort, as damage occurred after the transfer and no tortious cause of action was assignable. Technotrade owed a duty of care to the neighbouring property owners for physical damage but not to Larkstore for economic loss. Technotrade did not owe a duty of care to Larkstore for economic loss because there was insufficient proximity and foreseeability; the duty did not extend to an indeterminate class of future developers.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined as follows: Larkstore can recover for breach of contract under the assignment; Technotrade owed a duty of care to the Claimants for physical damage; Technotrade owed Larkstore a duty of care only in relation to physical damage to adjoining property, not for economic loss.

Orders

  • Larkstore entitled to recover for breach of contract under the assignment.
  • Technotrade owed a duty of care to the Claimants for physical damage.