Renwick & Anor v Simon and Michael Brooke Architects & Ors [2011] EWHC 874 (TCC) (05 May 2011)

Renwick & Anor v Simon and Michael Brooke Architects & Ors [2011] EWHC 874 (TCC) (05 May 2011)

The claimants had sufficient knowledge by 2002 of the material facts about the damage, its seriousness, and its attribution to Attwell's acts or omissions to justify instituting proceedings. Therefore, the limitation period began to run by 2002, and all claims except those relating to alleged negligent advice on remedial works by internal render are statute-barred. Only the latter claim has a sufficiently arguable prospect of success to survive summary judgment.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 874 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: James Renwick; Claimant: Vanessa Renwick; Defendant: Simon and Michael Brooke Architects; Defendant: William Attwell and Associates; Defendant: Aquarend Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Second Defendant (william Attwell and Associates)
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of William Attwell and Associates on all claims except those relating to alleged negligent advice regarding remedial works by internal render.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Negligence, Summary Judgment, Latent Damage, Professional Duty of Care
Civil Procedure Construction Law Professional Negligence Limitation of Actions Negligence Summary Judgment Latent Damage Professional Duty of Care

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Renwick

Claimant

Vanessa Renwick

Claimant

Simon and Michael Brooke Architects

Defendant

William Attwell and Associates

Defendant

Aquarend Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Second Defendant (william Attwell and Associates)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against William Attwell and Associates is statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 When the limitation period began to run for the purposes of section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980
  3. 3 Whether the claimants had the requisite knowledge to bring a claim within the limitation period

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants had sufficient knowledge by 2002 of the material facts about the damage, its seriousness, and its attribution to Attwell's acts or omissions to justify instituting proceedings. Therefore, the limitation period began to run by 2002, and all claims except those relating to alleged negligent advice on remedial works by internal render are statute-barred. Only the latter claim has a sufficiently arguable prospect of success to survive summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of William Attwell and Associates on all claims except those relating to alleged negligent advice regarding remedial works by internal render.

Orders

  • All claims against William Attwell and Associates except those relating to alleged negligent advice on remedial works by internal render are dismissed as statute-barred.
  • Claimants may apply to amend their pleadings regarding the negligent advice claim, subject to the court's permission.