125 OBS (Nominees1) & Anor v Lend Lease Construction (Europe) Ltd & Anor

125 OBS (Nominees1) & Anor v Lend Lease Construction (Europe) Ltd & Anor

The defendants breached the contract by failing to ensure that all glass was properly heat soaked in accordance with the 2005 Standard (with extended holding phase), as required by the contract. At least 35-40% of the glass was not heat soaked, resulting in a rate of spontaneous failures far exceeding the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: 125 OBS (Nominees1) & anr; Defendant: Lend Lease Construction (Europe) Limited & anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction/contract) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimants
Legal Topics
Design and Build Contracts, Breach of Contract, Damages, Service Life Obligations, Heat Soak Testing, Product Liability
Construction Law Contract Law Design and Build Contracts Breach of Contract Damages Service Life Obligations Heat Soak Testing Product Liability

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

125 OBS (Nominees1) & anr

Claimant

Lend Lease Construction (Europe) Limited & anr

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction/contract) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants complied with contractual obligations regarding heat soaking of glass under the 2005 Standard
  2. 2 Whether the glass supplied met the specified service and design life requirements
  3. 3 Whether the failures and consequential losses were caused by breach of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants breached the contract by failing to ensure that all glass was properly heat soaked in accordance with the 2005 Standard (with extended holding phase), as required by the contract. At least 35-40% of the glass was not heat soaked, resulting in a rate of spontaneous failures far exceeding the anticipated residual risk. The contract imposed multiple discrete obligations, including service life, design life, and quality, not limited to heat soaking. The failures and consequential losses were caused by this breach. The remedial scheme (reglazing) and associated costs, including third-party settlements and finance charges, were reasonable and recoverable.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimants

Orders

  • Defendants to pay damages of £14,753,195.16 to the Claimants
  • Interest to be calculated separately