Costain Ltd v Charles Haswell & Partners Ltd [2009] EWHC B25 (TCC) (24 September 2009)

Costain Ltd v Charles Haswell & Partners Ltd [2009] EWHC B25 (TCC) (24 September 2009)

A binding contract was formed between Costain and Haswell by 3 October 2002, either expressly or by conduct, despite the unresolved architectural issue. Clause 7.4 of the Consultancy Agreement imposes strict liability on Haswell for its design if constructed as part of the permanent works, but does not apply to the surcharge mound since it was not incorporated into the permanent works. Measurement of settlement tolerances should commence at the start of commissioning. Haswell was not strictly liable for the surcharge mound under Clause 7.4, but remained subject to the duty of care under Clause 7.2.

Citation
[2009] EWHC B25
Parties
Claimant: Costain Limited; Defendant: Charles Haswell & Partners Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Commercial Construction Dispute / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim partially succeeded
Legal Topics
Contract Formation, Strict Liability in Consultancy Agreements, Professional Duty of Care, Interpretation of Contractual Terms, Damages for Breach of Contract
Contract Law Professional Negligence Construction Law Contract Formation Strict Liability in Consultancy Agreements Professional Duty of Care Interpretation of Contractual Terms Damages for Breach of Contract

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Costain Limited

Claimant

Charles Haswell & Partners Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Construction Dispute / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding contract existed between Costain and Haswell
  2. 2 Whether Clause 7.4 of the Consultancy Agreement imposes strict liability
  3. 3 Whether the surcharge mound designed by Haswell falls within Clause 7.4

Ratio Decidendi

A binding contract was formed between Costain and Haswell by 3 October 2002, either expressly or by conduct, despite the unresolved architectural issue. Clause 7.4 of the Consultancy Agreement imposes strict liability on Haswell for its design if constructed as part of the permanent works, but does not apply to the surcharge mound since it was not incorporated into the permanent works. Measurement of settlement tolerances should commence at the start of commissioning. Haswell was not strictly liable for the surcharge mound under Clause 7.4, but remained subject to the duty of care under Clause 7.2.

Court Disposition

Claim partially succeeded

Orders

  • Declaration that a binding contract existed between Costain and Haswell as of 3 October 2002
  • Clause 7.4 imposes strict liability only for permanent works constructed per Haswell's design, not for the surcharge mound