Russell & Anor v Stone (t/a PSP Consultants) & Anor

Russell & Anor v Stone (t/a PSP Consultants) & Anor

The court found that PSP did not fail properly to manage or advise on the tender process, did not act negligently in relation to the performance bond, valuation of works, or monitoring of quality, and that even if there had been breaches, the Russells failed to prove causation or quantifiable loss. The claimants’ case was based on generalised assertions without sufficient evidence of specific breaches or causal links to the alleged overspend. Accordingly, the claim failed.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Stuart Howard Russell; Claimant: Mrs Naomi Patricia Russell; Defendant: Peter Stone (trading as PSP Consultants); Defendant: PSP Consultants (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Project Management, Quantity Surveying, Tender Process, Performance Bonds, Valuation of Works, Contract Administration, Causation and Loss, Specification and Design Responsibility
Professional Negligence Construction Law Contract Law Project Management Quantity Surveying Tender Process Performance Bonds Valuation of Works +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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Stuart Howard Russell

Claimant

Mrs Naomi Patricia Russell

Claimant

Peter Stone (trading as PSP Consultants)

Defendant

PSP Consultants (A Firm)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether PSP failed properly to manage and/or advise on the tender process for the construction project.
  2. 2 Whether PSP was negligent in not obtaining a performance bond from Ibex.
  3. 3 Whether PSP failed properly to value Ibex’s works.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that PSP did not fail properly to manage or advise on the tender process, did not act negligently in relation to the performance bond, valuation of works, or monitoring of quality, and that even if there had been breaches, the Russells failed to prove causation or quantifiable loss. The claimants’ case was based on generalised assertions without sufficient evidence of specific breaches or causal links to the alleged overspend. Accordingly, the claim failed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • The claim by Mr and Mrs Russell is dismissed.
  • The counterclaim by PSP Consultants is dismissed.