Mouchel Ltd. v Van Oord (UK) Ltd. [2011] EWHC 72 (TCC) (25 January 2011)

Mouchel Ltd. v Van Oord (UK) Ltd. [2011] EWHC 72 (TCC) (25 January 2011)

Van Oord is liable to Mouchel for a contribution under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, as Van Oord's defective installation of scour protection and supply of unsuitable backfill material contributed to the damage for which Mouchel settled with Kier. The contractual documents and evidence establish Van...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 72 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Mouchel Limited; Defendant: Van Oord (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Contribution Claim Under Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978 / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Van Oord is liable to make a contribution to Mouchel.
Legal Topics
Contribution, Negligence, Defective Works, Subcontractor Liability, Design Responsibility
Construction Law Tort Law Contract Law Contribution Negligence Defective Works Subcontractor Liability Design Responsibility

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mouchel Limited

Claimant

Van Oord (UK) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contribution Claim Under Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978 / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is Van Oord liable to Mouchel for a contribution in respect of Mouchel's settlement with Kier?
  2. 2 Did Van Oord supply unsuitable backfill material or install defective scour protection?
  3. 3 Was Mouchel negligent in design?

Ratio Decidendi

Van Oord is liable to Mouchel for a contribution under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, as Van Oord's defective installation of scour protection and supply of unsuitable backfill material contributed to the damage for which Mouchel settled with Kier. The contractual documents and evidence establish Van Oord's responsibility for execution and workmanship, and Mouchel's design role does not absolve Van Oord from its own failures in implementation.

Court Disposition

Van Oord is liable to make a contribution to Mouchel.

Orders

  • Van Oord to pay Mouchel a contribution in respect of the settlement with Kier; quantum to be determined or assessed if not agreed.
  • Costs reserved pending assessment of quantum.