199 Knightsbridge Development Ltd v WSP UK Ltd

199 Knightsbridge Development Ltd v WSP UK Ltd

WSP should have foreseen the risk of catastrophic pressure surges following partial drain down and restart of the cold water system, but the Claimant failed to prove that any steps WSP should have taken would have prevented the flooding on 15 September 2005. The only precaution that would have prevented the failures...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: 199 Knightsbridge Development Ltd; Defendant: WSP UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Standard of Care, Causation, Duty of Care, Bolam Test, Building Services Engineering, Contractual Obligations
Professional Negligence Construction Law Standard of Care Causation Duty of Care Bolam Test Building Services Engineering Contractual Obligations

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

199 Knightsbridge Development Ltd

Claimant

WSP UK Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether WSP UK Ltd was negligent in the design of the cold water system resulting in catastrophic flooding
  2. 2 Whether WSP owed a duty to prevent catastrophic pressure surges
  3. 3 Whether WSP's actions met the standard of care expected of competent engineers

Ratio Decidendi

WSP should have foreseen the risk of catastrophic pressure surges following partial drain down and restart of the cold water system, but the Claimant failed to prove that any steps WSP should have taken would have prevented the flooding on 15 September 2005. The only precaution that would have prevented the failures was the fitting of anti-surge valves, but it was unlikely these would have been installed in time even if WSP had advised them. The claim fails for lack of causation.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed