IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN MICHAEL JOSEPH DEOSARAN HOUSING & INVESTMENT TRINIDAD & TOBAGO APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS AND
|
|
- Valentine Hood
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CvA. NO. 59 OF 2002 BETWEEN MICHAEL JOSEPH DEOSARAN HOUSING & INVESTMENT TRINIDAD & TOBAGO APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS AND WINSTON BARROW JUDITH BARROW PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS CORAM: M. Warner, J.A. W. Kangaloo, J.A. S. John, J.A. APPEARANCES: Mrs. R. Van Lare for the Appellant Ms. J. Jones for the Respondent DATE DELIVERED: 10 th February, 2004 JUDGMENT Delivered by Warner J.A. Page 1 of 24
2 1. This case raised a narrow but important issue. It concerned the duty of care if any, which a land developer owed to a purchaser who entered into a contract with the developer to purchase lands at Diego Martin which were owned by the developer, together with a building, (in this case a dwelling house), which the developer promised to build and did build, according to his (the developer s) design and specifications and with his materials, on the parcel of land. 2. The plaintiffs brought their action in contract for breach of an implied covenant; and in tort, for negligence. They did not however, pursue the claim in contract and chose to leave it not argued. The learned trial judge held however that the claim in contract was statute barred, and there has been no appeal against that finding. I need only concern myself peripherally, with that issue. 3. The plaintiffs case is a claim for pure economic loss, the type of claim which has always produced a wide range of conflicting authorities in England. Although I shall refer later in this judgment in more detail to the case of Murphy v Brentwood [1991] 1 AC 398, I think I ought to extract from that judgment the concise and helpful explanation as to the characteristics of pure economic loss, in the context of this case. At page 479, Lord Bridge observed - damage to a house which is attributable to a defect in the structure of the house is not recoverable in tort on Donoghue v Stevenson principles, but represents purely economic loss which is only recoverable in contract or in tort by reason of some relationship of Page 2 of 24
3 proximity which imposes on the tortfeasor a duty of care to protect against economic loss. In my view, therefore, the principles to be applied in the instant case are to be found in Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. v Heller and Partners Ltd. [1964] A.C. 465; Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd. [1995] 2 A.C. 145; Marc Rich & Co. v Bishop Rock Marine Co. Ltd. [1996] 1 AC 211 and Williams v Natural Life Ltd. [1998] 1 WLR 830. I shall refer to these authorities later in this judgment. 4. In their statement of claim the plaintiffs sought to recover the cost of remedial work as well as the pecuniary loss suffered as a result of the sale of the dwelling house and land, hereinafter referred to as the property, at a reduced value. The trial judge gave judgment for the plaintiffs, and in assessing damages he used the market value of the property in the year 1979, at the time of the purchase as providing some evidence of value of the premises as it should have been, that is to say, $225,000. From that figure he deducted the price for which it was sold in the year 1989 ($130,000.) and awarded the plaintiffs damages in the sum of $95,000. with interest at the rate of 3% from May 26 th 1988 to September 20 th 2000 and thereafter at the rate of 6%. 5. The defendants appealed on the issue of liability and the award of damages. The plaintiffs cross-appealed on the quantum of damages. Page 3 of 24
4 The specific issues which were agreed upon by the parties to arise for determination by this court are issues of law and fact (1) whether the defendants were under a duty to conduct a subsoil investigation, that is to carry out bores and digs in order to determine the subsurface soil conditions and to ascertain the suitability of the site. (2) whether on the facts, the failure of the defendants to carry out bores or digs fell short of the exercise of ordinary professional care and skill. (3) The measure of damages. These issues arise directly from the grounds of appeal filed by the parties. 6. Mendonca J. has comprehensively set out the facts in his judgment. I need therefore only summarise them. Background facts In 1961, members of the Jutagir family owned a parcel of land comprising 2 acres and 14 perches at Diego Martin. They obtained planning permission to subdivide it into building lots, each comprising 5000 sq. ft. or thereabout. In 1974 the defendants purchased the entire parcel and continued to develop the land by establishing roads, putting the infrastructure in place and obtaining the necessary statutory approvals. Phase (1) of the project was commenced and completed in or about Page 4 of 24
5 Five houses were built by the defendants and they were sold to various persons. 7. In 1979, in response to a newspaper advertisement, the plaintiffs offered to purchase from the defendants a lot of land comprising 4,960 sq. ft., with a house to be constructed on the land by the defendants at a total price of $225,000. This transaction represented part of the Phase (2) project. The plaintiffs duly paid the purchase price. 8. The plaintiffs house was completed in or about March By deed dated 13 th June 1980 and registered as No. 122 of 1980 the parcel of land and the building erected and standing thereon were conveyed by the first defendant to the plaintiffs, in fee simple as joint tenants. By the year 1983 cracks had begun to appear on both the substructure and superstructure of the house. Part of the boundary wall became contorted and had to be replaced. 9. The plaintiffs made a claim on their insurers, who, through their adjusters employed an engineer, Dr. Braveboy to advise them. After requesting that a pit be dug and conducting soil investigations, Dr. Braveboy discovered vegetable fill some five feet under the surface and he concluded that it was likely that the vegetable soil layer extended over a large portion of the lands thereby rendering the lands mobile and susceptible to external loads. He stated that any changes in the water content of that strata of the soil would result in vertical as well as lateral movement. According to Dr. Braveboy, it is normal that all vegetable Page 5 of 24
6 material be removed from a building site before any fill is utilized, but this was not done in this case. 10. Dr. Braveboy made certain recommendations which were not followed by the plaintiffs. The insurers settled the plaintiffs claim in the sum of $51,482. Thereafter the plaintiffs did repairs to the house and to the foundation, aimed at stabilizing the foundation. It is of some relevance that in the course of these repairs the plaintiffs discovered concrete culverts running below the surface of the lands in the area of the garage and towards and along one of the boundary walls. Stones and boulders in plastic bags were found in the culverts. At the northeastern corner of the house there were boulders covering a spring which was overlaid by galvanized iron sheets. The water from the spring flowed towards the house. The plaintiffs took steps to divert the water away from the house by installing pipes to convey the water into the waste water drainage system. This discovery had not been brought to Dr. Braveboy s attention, and the trial judge held that it would be speculative to conclude that it would have featured as a cause of the damage. 11. However, although the defendants claimed to have had no knowledge of the spring or the culverts, the trial judge found that, given the closeness of both to the surface, it was more probable than not, that even if the culverts were not placed there by the defendants that during the course of construction of the house they must have been aware of them and so too of the spring. Page 6 of 24
7 12. In 1985, repairs were completed and the property was leased to the Government of Trinidad and Tobago for occupation by its employee. The problems however resurfaced. Cracks appeared once more in the same and other areas of the house. 13. Although it was not argued in the court below, this court requested both counsel to consider whether or not the principles formulated in the leading case of Murphy v Brentwood (above), applied to the facts of this case. 14. The plaintiffs case at the trial was grounded on the expert evidence contained in Dr. Braveboy s report of the 3 rd December This evidence was not challenged. His findings, as they appeared in his report were as follows - 1. It is conceivable that the vegetable soil layer extends over a sizable portion of land in this locality. 2. This layer of soil contains a large proportion of decaying vegetable material and it is quite porous. 3. The underlying strata will be more dense and is probably gravelly-clay as elsewhere in this area. 4. Water in the soil will almost certainly saturate the entrapped vegetable layer thus increasing the volume of material in this strata as well as rendering it potentially mobile and susceptible to external loads. 5. Changes in water content of this strata of soil will result in compression of the strata, a vertical movement, as well as some associated lateral movement. Page 7 of 24
8 6. It is normal that all vegetable material be removed from a building site before any fill is utilised. This was not done here. The problem now, is to reduce the effective plan area of the unsatisfactory strata and so reduce or isolate vertical and lateral movement. 7. It is recommended that a system utilising (a) rubble drain around building and (b) short radial retaining wall with counterforts be employed; the whole, designed to maintain stable ground conditions thus allowing better control of building movement. The plaintiffs relied in the main, on the defendants failure to remove the vegetable fill, and the presence of the subterranean drain. Counsel for the defendants submitted that the developer, having observed that the quality of the soil was sandy loam, had taken that factor into consideration in determining the type of foundation. He had no knowledge of the vegetable or grassy material. Accordingly, the resulting damage to the building was not foreseeable. 14. At the outset, I ought to mention that the limitation point apart, there was clear and cogent evidence to support a claim in contract founded on a breach of an implied warranty, that is to say, a breach of duty to build the house in a good and workmanlike manner. It is indeed in this context that the trial judge s citation of the case of Hannock v Brazier Ltd. [1966] 2 All E.R. 901 was relevant. It was held that where a purchaser bought a house from a builder who contracted to build it, a three fold warranty was implied Page 8 of 24
9 (a) that the builder would do his work in a good and workmanlike manner; (b) (c) that he would supply good and proper materials that the house would be reasonably fit for human habitation and the warranty extended to materials used before the contract was signed. 15. The trial judge found that the claim in contract was statute barred. It was, however, in my view, necessary for him to go on to examine whether there was a breach of duty in tort. It is of course recognised that, since there was no exclusion or limitation of liability, it was possible for the plaintiffs to make concurrent claims in contract and tort. (See Henderson s case above at pages and CvA. No. 23 of 1991 (unreported) Bank of Commerce and Trinidad & Tobago Ltd. v David Lakhan (Administrator of the Estate of Mary Lakhan). 16. Analysis of the legal principles A convenient starting point is the case of Marc Rich (above) where it was held that whatever harm, a plaintiff suffered, in order to determine the defendant s liability in tort for negligence, the court had to consider the elements of foreseeability and proximity, and whether it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care on the defendant. Page 9 of 24
10 17. In Marc at page 235, Lord Steyn observed that these principles of law had been settled since the decision in Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd. v Home Office [1970] A.C Since however, in the instant case, it was common ground that the damage consisted of economic loss, further proof beyond the criteria of foreseeability was required. 18. Before I refer to what I consider to be the other governing principles I must consider the leading case of Murphy v Brentwood (above) which comes into focus in any case in which, as in the present, a claim is made for damages for economic loss. Although this case related primarily to liability alleged to have been incurred by a local authority for approving plans negligently prepared by an engineer employed by a developer, the principles are of much wider application. A house of seven judges presided over by the Lord Chancellor was convened and it subsequently overruled Anns v Merton London Borough [1978]A.C. 728, its own decision which had stood for twelve years. Briefly, in Anns, a remedy in tort was held to have been available to an occupier who found that a house he had purchased was built on defective foundation. Under the doctrine, espoused in Anns, a householder of a house, whether first or subsequent purchaser could recover anticipatory costs against the person responsible for structural defects - that is to say, the builder or the person responsible for enforcing building regulations, not only for personal injury but for the cost of Page 10 of 24
11 remedying defects. Lord Wilberforce in delivering the leading judgment referred to the two stage process - that is whether there was the sufficient relationship of proximity and secondly, whether any considerations were present to negate, reduce or limit the duty. The upshot of that decision (Ann s) was that there was support for new areas of liability in the tort of negligence under a new and broader approach. 19. In Murphy, the facts were that ABC Homes as part of a large development, built some 160 dwelling houses on a sloping site which had to be filled and levelled. Conventional foundation was not used. A concrete raft foundation was cast below the surface level, and filled. It proved to be inadequate. The plaintiff purchased his home in By 1981, the foundation had become distorted and cracks appeared in the walls of the house. 20. The plaintiff claimed damages for negligence against the District Council which had approved the plans. He was awarded damages in the sum of 35,000. the loss he sustained on resale of the house in its defective state. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision on the basis of Anns. The decision was reversed by the House of Lords. It was held that no action in negligence could be brought by an owner occupier of a defective building against persons who were concerned with its construction, including the local authorities unless the building had caused personal injury or damage to property other than the building itself. Page 11 of 24
12 21. What however, is of most relevance to the instant case is that in all the speeches in Murphy, claims for economic loss based on the voluntary assumption of liability under Hedley Byrne principle was clearly recognized. (See in particular speeches of Lord Keith at 468 and Lord Bridge at 481). 22. While therefore there was a proximate relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendants that reasonable care be exercised with respect to the building including the foundation, the question was whether that relationship and duty of care, extended to economic loss suffered by the plaintiff. 23. The law was later developed in Henderson v Merrett Syndicates when the theory of assumption of responsibility, which was rejected in the case of Smith v Eric Bush [1989] 2 All E.R. 574 was restored. 24. In Henderson Lord Goff at page 180 had this to say In subsequent cases concerned with liability under the Hedley Byrne principle in respect of negligent misstatements, the question has frequently arisen whether the plaintiff falls within the category of persons to whom the maker of the statement owes a duty of care. In seeking to contain that category of persons within reasonable bounds, there has been some tendency on the part of the courts to criticise the concept of assumption of responsibility as being unlikely to be a helpful or realistic test in most cases (see Smith v Eric S. Bush [1990] 1 A.C. 831, , per Lord Griffiths; and see also Caparo Industries Plc. V Dickman [1990] 2 A.C. 605, 628, per Lord Roskill). However, at least in cases such as the present, in which the same problem does not arise, there seems to be no reason why recourse should not be had to the concept, which appears after all to have been adopted, in one form or another, by all of their Lordships in Hedley Byrne [1964] A.C. 465 (see e.g. Lord Reid, at pp. 483, 486 and 487; Page 12 of 24
13 Lord Morris (with whom Lord Hodson agreed), at p. 494; Lord Devlin, at pp. 529 and 531; and Lord Pearce at p.538). Furthermore, especially in a context concerned with a liability which may arise under a contract or in a situation equivalent to contract, it must be expected that an objective test will be applied when asking the question whether, in a particular case, responsibility should be held to have been assumed by the defendant to the plaintiff see Caparo Industries Plc. V Dickman [1990] 2 A.C. 605, 637 per Lord Oliver of Aylmerton. In addition, the concept provides its own explanation why there is no problem in cases of this kind about liability for pure economic loss; for if a person assumes responsibility to another in respect of certain services, there is no reason why he should not be liable in damages for that other in respect of economic loss which flows from the negligent performance of those services. It follows that, once the case is identified as falling within the Hedley Byrne principle, there should be no need to embark upon any further enquiry whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose liability for economic loss. (Emphasis added) It is also useful to mention Lord Browne- Wilkinson s observations in White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207 at 273. He stated Just as in the case of fiduciary duties, the assumption of responsibility referred to is the defendants assumption of responsibility for the task not the assumption of legal liability. Even in cases of ad hoc relationships, it is the undertaking to answer the question posed which creates the relationship. If the responsibility for the task is assumed by the defendant he thereby creates a special relationship between himself and the plaintiff in relation to which the law (not the defendant) attaches a duty to carry out carefully the task so assumed. Later in Williams, (above) Lord Steyn in a concise judgment under the rubric The theory of the extended Hedley Byrne principle, said at page It is clear, and accepted by counsel on both sides, that the governing principles are stated in the leading speech of Lord Page 13 of 24
14 Goff of Chieveley in Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd. [1995] 2 A.C First, in Henderson s case it was settled that the assumption of responsibility principle enunciated in Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. v Heller & Partners Ltd. [1964] A.C. 465 is not confined to statements but may apply to any assumption of responsibility for the provision of services. The extended Hedley Byre principle is the rationalisation or technique adopted by English law to provide a remedy for the recovery of damages in respect of economic loss caused by the negligent performance of services. Secondly, it was established that once a case is identified as falling within the extended Hedley Byrne principle, there is no need to embark on any further inquiry whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose liability for economic loss: p Thirdly, and applying Hedley Byrne, it was made clear that - reliance upon [the assumption of responsibility] by the other party will be necessary to establish a cause of action (because otherwise the negligence will have no causative effect) (p.180) Fourthly, it was held that the existence of a contractual duty of care between the parties does not preclude the concurrence of a tort duty in the same respect. (Emphasis added) 25. The findings of the trial judge For ease of reference, I shall summarise the trial judge s significant findings of fact 1. that the defendants attempt to suggest that the damage was caused by blasting in a nearby quarry was a recent fabrication. 2. that the cause of the damage in 1983 and 1988 was the presence of the porous material (vegetable fill) below the foundation. The existence of such material resulted in unstable Page 14 of 24
15 conditions and impacted adversely on the load bearing capability of the soil. The land was prone to foundation movement. 3. that the defendants must have become aware of the culverts and spring under the surface, during the course of construction. 4. that the design was not suitable. 26. Application of relevant principles to facts Although the actual text of the advertisement for sale was not adduced in evidence, it was common ground that the defendants offered to provide financing to prospective purchasers. This offer in my view, demonstrated the defendants strategy to make the offer attractive to purchasers. It is also a reasonable inference, that the first defendant, having shown to the first plaintiff the five houses in Phase (1) which he had completed, would have used that achievement to encourage the plaintiff to take part in the second phase of the development. 27. In examination-in-chief, the first defendant in his evidence concerning the preliminary matters connected with the sale, said - I requested Mr. Barrow to check for his mortgage and to select a colour scheme.. I gave Mr. Barrow a copy of the house plan together with receipt for down payment and the land plan for the phase. Page 15 of 24
16 28. The plan was therefore a contemporaneous document which was submitted by the defendants as owner/builders to the building authority for its approval. The plan referred to foundation detail, an item for which, as the evidence shows, the first defendant specifically assumed responsibility. He testified as follows - The soil is referred to as sandy loam. The soil condition played a part in the foundation used. That type of soil required the laying of ground because similar to Westmoorings. The ground plans were provided for in the plans. As regards the preparatory work, the defendants were responsible for clearing the land for development. He testified We cleared six inches off the land after cutlassing it.. all my lots were cleared in one day.. after the site was cleared.. we filled the house site with 20 loads. The first defendant also accepted in cross-examination that it was not proper procedure to cover down a spring and build on it. 29. The first defendant has had thirty-four years experience as a contractor. Both defendants had experience in the development of residential buildings. They arranged for the plans to be drawn and they obtained the necessary approvals. They used what they considered to be the appropriate structural, mechanical, geotechnical and engineering procedures. They secured the building material. Page 16 of 24
17 30. The trial judge had to determine on that evidence, whether the appropriate standard of care and skill had been met before the foundation was constructed. The defendants relationship with the plaintiffs was multi-faceted. They were vendors, developers and building contractors. Clearly, the situation demanded the use of special skills and competence. The standard of skill was that of a person of ordinary competence exercising the same calling. The defendants, having undertaken the task of developing and building, would therefore have been expected to exercise the skill and competence of an ordinary competent practitioner of the relevant calling. (See Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 at 586). 31. In deciding what the appropriate standard of skill was, the trial judge was presented with the unchallenged evidence of Dr. Braveboy, whose finding was that the vegetable fill extended over a sizeable portion of land in that locality and ought to have been removed. It is clear to me that an ordinary prudent and reasonable person would have foreseen that to build on vegetable fill, was inherently risky and would ultimately result in damage and loss. 32. If the defendants did not have the necessary skill, then they ought not to have been engaged in the business of development and construction. If, as the first defendant testified, on a visual inspection, he concluded that a certain type of foundation was appropriate, without Page 17 of 24
18 having carried out the necessary bores and digs, then he had not fulfilled his obligations as a developer. 33. The defendants had clearly assumed responsibility for the suitability of the site, the plans, the quality of earth fill and workmanship. As subsequent events proved, the defendants did not carry out a full investigation of the site. Lord Steyn in the recent case of Phelps v Hillingdon London Borough Council [2000] WLR 776, in considering whether a local authority, and a psychologist employed by them owed a duty of care to provide educational services of children at school at 791E said It is sometimes said that there has to be an assumption of responsibility by the person concerned. That phrase can be misleading in that it can suggest that the professional person must knowingly and deliberately accept responsibility. It is however, clear that the test is an objective one... The phrase means simply that the law recognises that there is a duty of care. It is not so much that responsibility is assumed as that it is recognized or imposed by the law. The concept was applied by this Court in the Bank of Commerce case (above), where the appellant bank had failed in its undertaking to remit certain insurance payments under a standing order which the respondent plaintiff had signed in favour of the insurance company. This Court upheld the trial judge s finding that the bank was negligent. The claim in contract was held to be statute barred. Hamel-Smith J.A. citing a passage from the speech of Lord Goff in Henderson, at page 180, Page 18 of 24
19 emphasised that the principle of assumption of responsibility extended beyond the provision of information and advice and included the performance of services. 34. Reliance by the plaintiffs upon the assumption of responsibility In Williams (above) Lord Steyn at page 836 warned that if reliance is not proved, it is not established that the assumption of personal responsibility had causative effect. The governing principle is to be found in Hedley Byrne at pages 502 and 503. The issue of reliance, in my view, was explained in the speech of Lord Morris when he said - Furthermore, if, in a sphere in which a person is so placed that others could reasonably rely upon his judgment or skill or upon his ability to make careful inquiry, a person takes it upon himself to give information or advice to or allows his information and advice to be passed on to another person who, as he knows, or should know will place reliance on it, then a duty of care will arise. It is clear that the plaintiffs accepted that the defendants undertook all aspects of the work, from the ground up, and from start to completion. In the final analysis, the trial judge s finding that the defendants were in breach of their duty of care can be supported on the evidence. 35. I do not think that it can be reasonably advanced that the pleading was deficient. As I see it, in the plaintiffs plea that the defendants Page 19 of 24
20 warranted that the premises would be reasonably fit for habitation could only refer to an implied commitment to the plaintiffs, and accordingly reinforces the assumption of responsibility aspect of the case. In this regard Lord Goff, in Henderson, observed that assumption of responsibility may and frequently does occur in a contractual context. As Lord Steyn observed at page 835 in the Williams case. The touchstone of liability is not the state of mind of the defendant. An objective test means that the primary focus must be on things said or done by the defendant or on his behalf in dealings with the plaintiff. In my view, the extended Hedley Byrne principle was clearly engaged. Everything done by the defendants or on their behalf fulfilled the criteria set out in the authorities to which I have referred. 36. The New Zealand position It is also useful to mention the case of Invercargill City Council v Hamlin [1996] A.C. 624 where the Privy Council upheld the decision of the New Zealand Court of Appeal in a building case. The New Zealand Court held that a local authority owed a duty to the plaintiff in respect of its inspection of defective foundations of a house which ultimately caused economic loss. In the Privy Council Lord Lloyd cited several authorities which were decided in the New Zealand Courts over a twenty-year period, which Page 20 of 24
21 concerned building cases and economic loss suffered by reason of defects. 37. It was held that since the common law adapted itself to the differing circumstances in which it had taken root, the Court of Appeal, in New Zealand, ought not to be deflected from developing the common law as was appropriate in its own setting. Their Lordships also took cognizance of the fact that in New Zealand, there was no legislation corresponding to the Defective Premises Act 1972, which was enacted in England, and which gave statutory protection to home owners. Therein lay the Privy Council s rationale for upholding the New Zealand court s refusal to apply Murphy. In this jurisdiction, there is as well, no similar legislation. I am however, content to decide this case on the assumption of responsibility and reliance principle for the reason that the facts of this case to my mind, indisputably point in that direction. 38. Damages The trial judge assessed damages on the basis of the difference in the value of the building as it should have been less its value as it was at the time of damage. It is to be recalled that the plaintiffs purchased the property for $225,000. and sold it for $130, The only evidence on damages was from a Report signed by Louis E. Kenny, an Appraiser and Certified member of the International Institute Page 21 of 24
22 of Valuers. The Report is dated 25 th April It appears to have been accepted without challenge. 40. The area in which the trial judge went wrong, however, was to have used the date of the purchase of the property by the plaintiffs as providing some evidence of the value of the property as it should have been. The trial judge in his judgment had this to say So far as the 1983 appraisal is concerned, 1983 was at or near the end of a period of relative prosperity for the country which saw an increase in the prices of real estate from year to year may have marked the end of that period but prices of real estate were still buoyant. There was however, no evidence to support this finding of fact. 41. The Valuer estimated that the value of the property as it stood was $400,000. In fact, he stated that the building was in good solid condition. The evidence however does not bear out that fact. The function of an expert witness is to assist the court on technical matters, so that it could form its independent judgment based on the facts proved in the case. In a valuation matter of this nature, I am of the view that the evidence of the Valuer would have been of more assistance to the court had he made his findings against the background of an engineering report, not necessarily Dr. Braveboy s. When therefore, he reported that the house was in good solid foundation in I have serious reservations about that conclusion and ultimately, his finding that the value of the house in 1983 was $400,000. The plaintiff testified that the tenant Page 22 of 24
23 who occupied the house complained about its state, and the fact that the occupants had endured the hardship for quite some time. Interestingly, the Valuer advised that homes in the area were in the range of $250,000 to $400,000 bracket. I am not however, prepared to use the higher end of the scale, in the light of the defective condition of the house and the fact that there were complaints about other houses in the development. It is of significance that Dr. Braveboy had concluded that vegetable soil layer extended over a sizeable portion of land in the locality. In my view, it is more appropriate to fix the value it would have fetched, at the lower end of the scale, that is to say $250, Order I would therefore deduct $130,000 from $250,000. and award the plaintiffs damages in the sum of $120,000. instead of $95,000. as awarded by the trial judge, with interest at the rate of 3% from May 26 th 1988 to September 28 th 2000 and thereafter at the rate of 6%. The appeal is therefore dismissed and the cross appeal, in respect of the quantum of damages is allowed to the extent that I have indicated above. Page 23 of 24
24 43. Costs The appellant will pay the respondents costs on the appeal and cross appeal. Margot Warner, Justice of Appeal I have read the judgment of Warner J.A. and I agree with it and do not wish to add to it. W. Kangaloo, Justice of Appeal I have read the judgment of Warner J.A. and I also agree with it and do not wish to add to it. S. John, Justice of Appeal Page 24 of 24
The Contractor s building defects liability in England and Wales
The Contractor s building defects liability in England and Wales We discuss in this paper in what circumstances can a contractor be found liable for defects discovered by the building occupier several
More informationExamining the current law relating to limitation and causes of action (tortious and contractual) within a construction context
Examining the current law relating to limitation and causes of action (tortious and contractual) within a construction context Received (in revised form): 11th September, 2005 Sarah Wilson is an associate
More informationNegligence: Approaching the duty of care
Negligence: Approaching the duty of care Introduction: Elements of negligence: - The defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care. - That the duty must have been breached. - That breach must have caused
More informationTHE BUILDING CONTROL AMENDMENT REGULATIONS. Martin Waldron BL
MARTIN WALDRON BL FCIArb MSCSI MRICS Accredited Adjudicator & Mediator Law Library The Four Courts Dublin 7 +353(1)8177865 +353(86)2395167 www.waldron.ie martin@waldron.ie THE BUILDING CONTROL AMENDMENT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Date of Release: May 1, 1992 No. 17176 Kamloops Registry IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: ) ) JACQUELYN BARBARA DAVIDSON ) ) REASONS FOR JUDGMENT PLAINTIFF ) ) OF THE HONOURABLE AND: )
More informationThe Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill, 2011 A Bill
The Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill, 2011 A Bill Page 1 of 21 Short Title Amendment of section- 2 of President's Act No.11 of 1973 as re-enacted and amended by U.P. Act 30
More informationMARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2011 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 This mark
More informationNo. 107,696 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. GREGORY COKER, Appellant, MICHAEL D. SILER, Defendant, and SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
No. 107,696 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS GREGORY COKER, Appellant, v. MICHAEL D. SILER, Defendant, and J.M.C. CONSTRUCTION, INC., and JOHN M. CHANEY, Appellees. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE INTERCOMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED AND CHARLES B. LAWRENCE AND ASSOCIATES
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV NO. 2012-01258 BETWEEN INTERCOMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED AND Claimant CHARLES B. LAWRENCE AND ASSOCIATES Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM
More informationAlister Holden & Murray Bridge as Trustees of the Estate of Bruce Morris Claimants. Peter Hanns trading as Hanns Builders & Joiners First Respondent
WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL CLAIM NO: TRI-2008-101-109 BETWEEN AND AND AND AND AND AND AND Alister Holden & Murray Bridge as Trustees of the Estate of Bruce Morris Claimants Vivienne Smitheram & Bernard
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHARLES SAYERS SHERRY SAYERS. and WILLIAM FRANCOIS CLARA FRANCOIS
SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUIT NO.: 1061 of 1996 BETWEEN CHARLES SAYERS SHERRY SAYERS and WILLIAM FRANCOIS CLARA FRANCOIS Plaintiffs Defendants Appearances Mr. W. Hinkson for the Plaintiffs
More informationTORTS SPECIFIC TORTS NEGLIGENCE
TORTS A tort is a private civil wrong. It is prosecuted by the individual or entity that was wronged against the wrongdoer. One aim of tort law is to provide compensation for injuries. The goal of the
More informationRECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE LIABILITY OF BUILDING PROFESSIONALS IN NSW
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE LIABILITY OF BUILDING PROFESSIONALS IN NSW Paper given by Brian Walton to the Annual Conference of the Australian Institute of Building Surveyors 21 22 July 2014 Introduction
More information-- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use:
Citation: 55 Cambridge L.J. 488 1996 Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline Fri Apr 21 04:25:41 2017 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2014-00133 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND ANAND SINGH Defendant AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD
More informationRecent Developments in the Law Relating to Negligence by a Public Authority
Recent Developments in the Law Relating to Negligence by a Public Authority Recent Developments in the Law Relating to Negligence by a Public Authority* By Ashish Chugh** Cite as : (2002) 7 SCC (Jour)
More informationIngles v. The Corporation of the City of Toronto Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada dated March 2, 2000
Ingles v. The Corporation of the City of Toronto Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada dated March 2, 2000 (City Council at its regular meeting held on October 3, 4 and 5, 2000, and its Special Meetings
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DEOCHAN SAMPATH AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2012-01734 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN DEOCHAN SAMPATH Claimant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO First Defendant TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV2012-00772 BETWEEN KELVIN DOOLARIE AND FIELD 1 st Claimant RAMCHARAN 2 nd Claimant PROBHADAI SOOKDEO BISSESSAR 1 st Defendant RAMCHARAN 2
More informationConstruction Warranties
Construction Warranties Jon W. Gilchrist Payne & Jones, Chartered Sealant, Waterproofing & Restoration Institute Fall Technical Meeting September 2006 Montreal Definition: What is a warranty? warranty?
More informationINDEX. . accountants and actuaries, negligence, . but-for test, factual causation.. but for test, material contribution test, 22-23
INDEX accountants and actuaries. contract, breach of, 157. damages, assessment, 159. duties owed to third parties, 67-68. fiduciary duty, breach of, 157-159. liability, generally, 149. negligence.. duty
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2016-00756 BETWEEN CANDICE MAHADEO Claimant AND GEISHA MAHADEO NIRMAL MAHADEO Defendants Before the Honourable Madam Justice Margaret
More informationENGINEERS AND ENGINEERING CONTRACTS Liabilities and Powers
ENGINEERS AND ENGINEERING CONTRACTS 1.0 Who is an Engineer? 1.1 A loose term, no common law definition. 1.2 Vague and circular definition given in section 2, Registration of Engineers Act, 1967 ( Engineers
More informationAust Law Symposium. Wednesday, 21 April Park Royal, Darling Harbour
Aust Law Symposium Wednesday, 21 April 2016 Park Royal, Darling Harbour The Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) - recent changes and cases Introduction 1. In late 2014 and early 2015, the NSW legislature passed
More information9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75
CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS Cambridge International Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2015 series 9084 LAW 9084/43 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 This mark scheme is published as an aid
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, Tobago) BETWEEN AND REASONS
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (Sub-Registry, Tobago) Claim No: CV 2009-2373 BETWEEN SEAN EVERT DENOON CLAIMANT AND OLIVER SALANDY DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. By way of her Lawful Attorney Kenneth Antoine. And
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2013-04883 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between SYBIL CHIN SLICK By way of her Lawful Attorney Kenneth Antoine Claimant GAIL HICKS And Defendant Before the
More informationJUDGMENT. Oceania Heights Limited (Appellant) v Willard Clarke Enterprises Limited & others (Respondent)
[2013] UKPC 3 Privy Council Appeal No 0049 of 2011 JUDGMENT Oceania Heights Limited (Appellant) v Willard Clarke Enterprises Limited & others (Respondent) From the Court of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas
More informationJUDGMENT. Tiuta International Limited (in liquidation) (Respondent) v De Villiers Surveyors Limited (Appellant)
Michaelmas Term [2017] UKSC 77 On appeal from: [2016] EWCA Civ 661 JUDGMENT Tiuta International Limited (in liquidation) (Respondent) v De Villiers Surveyors Limited (Appellant) before Lady Hale, President
More informationCase Note. Carty v London Borough Of Croydon. Andrew Knott. I Context
Case Note Carty v London Borough Of Croydon Andrew Knott Macrossans Lawyers, Brisbane, Australia I Context The law regulating schools, those who work in them, and those who deal with them, involves increasingly
More information[Cite as Martin v. Design Constr. Servs., Inc., 121 Ohio St.3d 66, 2009-Ohio-1.]
[Cite as Martin v. Design Constr. Servs., Inc., 121 Ohio St.3d 66, 2009-Ohio-1.] MARTIN ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. DESIGN CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC., APPELLEE. [Cite as Martin v. Design Constr. Servs., Inc.,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE GARY LEGGE AND MAUREEN LEGGE. Between CHRIS RAMSAWACK AND WESTERN SHIP AND RIG SUPPLIES LIMITED
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2013-00249 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE GARY LEGGE 1 st Claimant AND MAUREEN LEGGE 2 nd Claimant Between CHRIS RAMSAWACK 1 st Defendant AND WESTERN SHIP AND RIG
More informationFINAL DETERMINATION Adjudicator: K D Kilgour
IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI 2010-100-000003 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 63 BETWEEN AND AND AND AND AND STEVEN MCANENEY and KEIKO MOCHIZUKI Claimant AUCKLAND COUNCIL First Respondent CHRISTOPHER and
More informationGERALDINE B. HOWELL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. THE CITY OF LUMBERTON, Defendant-Appellant. No. COA (Filed 17 July 2001)
GERALDINE B. HOWELL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. THE CITY OF LUMBERTON, Defendant-Appellant No. COA00-310 (Filed 17 July 2001) 1. Cities and Towns--municipality s improper maintenance of storm drainage pipe--no
More informationHORNER INVESTMENTS CC GENERAL PETROLEUM INSTALLATIONS CC
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) Case No.3433/12 Dates heard: 12-15/11/13 (trial); 24 and 29/1/14 (heads of argument re amendment) Date delivered: 27/2/14 Not reportable
More informationc t EXPROPRIATION ACT
c t EXPROPRIATION ACT PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to December 2, 2015. It is intended for information and reference
More informationMurphy (Respondent) v. Brentwood District Council (Appellants) JUDGMENT. Die Jovis 26 Julii 1990
Murphy (Respondent) v. Brentwood District Council (Appellants) JUDGMENT Die Jovis 26 Julii 1990 Upon Report from the Appellate Committee to whom was referred the Cause Murphy against Brentwood District
More informationJUDGMENT. Republic Bank Limited (Appellant) v Lochan and another (Respondents) (Trinidad and Tobago)
Trinity Term [2015] UKPC 26 Privy Council Appeal No 0087 of 2014 JUDGMENT Republic Bank Limited (Appellant) v Lochan and another (Respondents) (Trinidad and Tobago) From the Court of Appeal of the Republic
More informationDivision 1 Preliminary
Division 1 Preliminary s. 151 Preliminary Division 1 s. 151 Division 1 Preliminary Subdivision 1 Interpretation 151. Terms used in this Part and Part 10 (1) In this Part and Part 10 acquiring authority,
More informationKEY ASPECTS OF THE LAW OF CONTRACT
This article is relevant to Paper F4 (ENG) Together, contract and the tort of negligence form syllabus area B of the Paper F4 (ENG) syllabus: the law of obligations. As this indicates, the areas have a
More informationAPPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TANEY COUNTY. Honorable Eric Eighmy. This case involves the purported 2005 sale of a garage at Pointe Royale
JOHN WESLEY STRANGE and ) SAUNDRA J. STRANGE, ) ) Plaintiffs-Respondents, ) ) v. ) No. SD35095 ) DANNY L. ROBINSON and ) Filed: June 5, 2018 TAYNIA ROBINSON, ) ) Defendants-Appellants. ) AFFIRMED APPEAL
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL JANIN CARIBBEAN CONSTRUCTION LIMITED. and [1] ERNEST CLARENCE WILKINSON [2] WILKINSON, WILKINSON & WILKINSON
GRENADA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL HCVAP 2010/001 JANIN CARIBBEAN CONSTRUCTION LIMITED and [1] ERNEST CLARENCE WILKINSON [2] WILKINSON, WILKINSON & WILKINSON Appellant Respondents Before: The Hon. Mde. Janice
More informationStrata Management 1 STRATA MANAGEMENT BILL 2012
Strata Management 1 STRATA MANAGEMENT BILL 2012 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES Par t I PRELIMINARY Clause 1. Short title, application and commencement 2. Interpretation 3. Construction of the Act Par t II ADMINISTRATION
More informationIN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 198 of 2011 BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY Appellant AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO NATIONAL PETROLEUM MARKETING COMPANY LIMITED
More informationREMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND NEGLIGENCE
REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND NEGLIGENCE INTRODUCTION Whilst the tests for establishing the existence of liability in contract and tort are different many principles are common to both forms of claim.
More informationREMOTENESS OF DAMAGES
REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES certainly now the rule about liability for the tort of negligence and it is a matter of convenience whether we say that where the damage is not of this kind there may be a breach
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 3 February 2015
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, SAN FERNANDO BETWEEN DANIEL SAHADEO ABRAHAM SAHADEO AGNES SULTANTI SELEINA SAHADEO AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD & TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, SAN FERNANDO Claim. No. CV2009 01979 BETWEEN DANIEL SAHADEO ABRAHAM SAHADEO AGNES SULTANTI SELEINA SAHADEO AND Claimants PERCIVAL JULIEN
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA110/05. William Young P, Arnold and Ellen France JJ
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA110/05 BETWEEN AND PRIME COMMERCIAL LIMITED Appellant WOOL BOARD DISESTABLISHMENT COMPANY LIMITED Respondent Hearing: 25 July 2006 Court: Counsel: William Young
More informationLIMITATION OF LIABILITY BY ACCOUNTANTS
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY BY ACCOUNTANTS Introduction 1. Traditionally, a central plank of an accountant s corporate work has been carrying out the audit. However, over the years the profession s role has
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND TECU CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2010-01135 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN ERNEST TROTMAN CAMILLE RICHARDS TROTMAN Claimants AND TECU CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ************************************************
More informationMARK SCHEME for the October/November 2013 series 9084 LAW. 9084/42 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75
CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the October/November 2013 series 9084 LAW 9084/42 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers
More informationStrict Liability and Product Liability PRODUCT LIABILITY WARRANTY LAW
Strict Liability and Product Liability PRODUCT LIABILITY The legal liability of manufacturers, sellers, and lessors of goods to consumers, users and bystanders for physical harm or injuries or property
More informationMARK SCHEME for the May/June 2012 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/42 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2012 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW 9084/42 Paper 4, maximum raw mark 75 This mark
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND SUMAIR MOHAN
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No: 45 of 2008 BETWEEN THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION APPELLANTS AND SUMAIR MOHAN RESPONDENT PANEL: A. Mendonça,
More informationREPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ELECTRICITY COMMISSION AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CvA. No. 174 of 1999 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ELECTRICITY COMMISSION APPELLANT AND JOHN MORRISON AND LYNDA MORRISON RESPONDENTS CORAM: S. SHARMA,
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. BETWEEN: CHARMAINE WARNER nee PEMBERTON. And JAMES ELVETT WARNER
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. SKBHMT2007/0073 BETWEEN: CHARMAINE WARNER nee PEMBERTON And JAMES ELVETT WARNER Applicant Respondent Appearances:
More informationTown and Country Planning Act Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 Part 1 - Particulars of Application Application Number: 13/0753 Outline Planning Permission
More informationOLIVIA WAIYEE LEE Appellant. WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent. Winkelmann, Simon France and Woolford JJ
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA656/2015 [2016] NZCA 258 BETWEEN AND OLIVIA WAIYEE LEE Appellant WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Hearing: 4 May 2016 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Winkelmann,
More informationLAWS OF FIJI CHAPTER 267 HOUSING ACT TABLE OF PROVISIONS
Rev. Edition 1985] LAWS OF FIJI CHAPTER 267 HOUSING ACT TABLE OF PROVISIONS SECTION 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 3. Establishment and constitution of Authority 3A. Directions 4. Temporary appointment
More informationBUILDING SERVICES CORPORATION ACT 1989 Na 147
BUILDING SERVICES CORPORATION ACT 1989 Na 147 NEW SOUTH WALES 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Definitions TABLE OF PROVISIONS PART 1 - PRELIMINARY PART 2 - REGULATION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WORK AND
More informationCHAPTER 4 BUILDINGS PART 1 DANGEROUS STRUCTURES PART 2 NUMBERING OF BUILDINGS PART 3 OCCUPANCY OF BUILDINGS
CHAPTER 4 BUILDINGS PART 1 DANGEROUS STRUCTURES 4-101. Definitions - Dangerous Buildings 4-102. Standards for Repair, Vacation or Demolition 4-103. Dangerous Buildings - Nuisances 4-104. Duties of Building
More informationDUTY OF CARE. The plaintiff must firstly establish that the defendant owed hum a duty of care: this arises where:
DUTY OF CARE REASONABLE FORESEEABILITY AND SALIENT FEATURES To recover damages in negligence, a plaintiff must firstly establish that the defendant owed him a duty of care. In broad terms, a duty of care
More informationORDINANCE NO. 193 AN ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND CONDUCT OF THE WATER DEPARTMENT OF THE VILLAGE OF DECATUR.
ORDINANCE NO. 193 AN ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND CONDUCT OF THE WATER DEPARTMENT OF THE VILLAGE OF DECATUR. THE VILLAGE OF DECATUR ORDAINS: Section 1. Administration. (a) The Water Superintendent,
More information472 ALBERTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. XXXIV, NO ]
472 ALBERTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. XXXIV, NO. 2 1996] CASE COMMENT: WINNIPEG CONDOMINIUM v. BIRD CONSTRUCTION - RECOVERY OF PURELY ECONOMIC LOSS IN THE TORT OF NEGLIGENCE: LIABILITY OF BUILDERS TO SUBSEQUENT
More informationTHE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM BYLAW NO CONSOLIDATED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM BYLAW NO. CONSOLIDATED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY A Bylaw to provide for the connection of sanitary sewers and storm drains from buildings and structures to the
More information1. The matter to be determined
Determination 2007/74 6 July 2007 A dispute in relation to the issue of a building consent and associated code compliance certificate for the conversion of a rumpus room to a bed and breakfast/homestay
More informationCambridge International Examinations Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level. Published
Cambridge International Examinations Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level LAW 9084/43 Paper 4 October/November 2016 MARK SCHEME Maximum Mark: 75 Published This mark scheme is
More informationJUDGMENT. Steel and another (Appellants) v NRAM Limited (formerly NRAM Plc) (Respondent) (Scotland)
Hilary Term [2018] UKSC 13 On appeal from: [2016] CSIH 11 JUDGMENT Steel and another (Appellants) v NRAM Limited (formerly NRAM Plc) (Respondent) (Scotland) before Lady Hale, President Lord Wilson Lord
More informationQuestion Farmer Jones? Discuss. 3. Big Food? Discuss. -36-
Question 4 Grain Co. purchases grain from farmers each fall to resell as seed grain to other farmers for spring planting. Because of problems presented by parasites which attack and eat seed grain that
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL. IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY LIBERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD (In Liquidation) AND
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 91 of 2015 Claim No. CV 04515 of 2009 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY LIBERTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD (In Liquidation) AND ORDER
More informationBERMUDA BERMUDA HOUSING ACT : 29
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA BERMUDA HOUSING ACT 1980 1980 : 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 PART I INTRODUCTORY Short title and commencement Interpretation
More informationTERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALES
1. Acceptance No Contract, Order or information (literature, drawings etc.) provided to or by the Purchaser shall be binding on Infra Green Ltd unless confirmed in the Infra Green Ltd Order Confirmation.
More informationRent Act 1977 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS CHAPTER 42. Controlled and regulated tenancies. Protected and statutory tenancies.
Rent Act 1977 CHAPTER 42 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Protected and statutory tenancies Section 1. Protected tenants and tenancies. 2. Statutory tenants and tenancies. 3. Terms and conditions
More informationTaking of Land Act 1964
Taking of Land Act 1964 SAMOA TAKING OF LAND ACT 1964 Arrangement of Provisions PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 3. Purposes may be declared to be public purposes 4. How notices to be
More informationCHAPTER 4 - EARTH REMOVAL BY-LAW
CHAPTER 4 - EARTH REMOVAL BY-LAW Section 1 - Definitions: Article I - Earth Removal (A) Interpretation: In Construing this By-Law, the following words shall have meaning herein given, unless a contrary
More informationJUDGMENT. Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited (Appellant) v Taylor-Wright (Respondent) (Jamaica)
Easter Term [2018] UKPC 12 Privy Council Appeal No 0011 of 2017 JUDGMENT Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited (Appellant) v Taylor-Wright (Respondent) (Jamaica) From the Court of Appeal of Jamaica before Lord
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE June 9, 2009 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE June 9, 2009 Session GEORGE R. CALDWELL, Jr., ET AL. v. PBM PROPERTIES Appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County No. 1-500-05 Dale C. Workman, Judge
More information[Cite as Skripac v. Kephart, 2002-Ohio-1539.] STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT
[Cite as Skripac v. Kephart, 2002-Ohio-1539.] STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT MICHAEL SKRIPAC, ) ) CASE NO. 01 CA 30 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, ) ) - VS - ) O P I N I O
More information2011 No. INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING, ENGLAND. The Rookery South (Resource Recovery Facility) Order 2011
Order made by the Infrastructure Planning Commission subject to special parliamentary procedure, and laid before Parliament under section 1 of the Statutory Orders (Special Procedure) Act 1945 on 29 November
More informationCASES. Liability for References: The House of Lords and. Tom Allen"
CASES Liability for References: The House of Lords and Spring v Guardian Assurance Introduction Tom Allen" In Spring v Guardian Assurance,' the House of Lords considered the question of negligence and
More informationHome Building Amendment Act 2014 No 24
New South Wales Home Building Amendment Act 2014 No 24 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Schedule 2 Amendment of NSW Self Insurance Corporation Act 2004 No 106 48 Schedule 3 Repeals 50 New
More informationMARK SCHEME for the May/June 2010 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW. 9084/43 Paper 43, maximum raw mark 75
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2010 question paper for the guidance of teachers 9084 LAW 9084/43 Paper 43, maximum raw mark 75 This mark
More informationTITLE 18 WATER AND SEWERS 1 CHAPTER 1. WATER. 2. SEWERS. 3. SEWAGE. 4. CROSS CONNECTIONS, AUXILIARY INTAKES, ETC. CHAPTER 1 WATER
18-1 TITLE 18 WATER AND SEWERS 1 CHAPTER 1. WATER. 2. SEWERS. 3. SEWAGE. 4. CROSS CONNECTIONS, AUXILIARY INTAKES, ETC. CHAPTER 1 WATER SECTION 18-101. Application and scope. 18-102. Definitions. 18-103.
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT CHAPTER 88:05
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKMEN S COMPENSATION ACT CHAPTER 88:05 WC105 of 2009 Application for Compensation by Dependants (1)Rhonda Glasgow- Caldiera for herself and on behalf
More information2013 CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY 2013 CHAPTER 7. An Act to amend The Condominium Property Act, 1993
1 CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY c. 7 CHAPTER 7 An Act to amend The Condominium Property Act, 1993 (Assented to May 15, ) HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan,
More informationBELIZE LIMITATION ACT CHAPTER 170 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000
BELIZE LIMITATION ACT CHAPTER 170 REVISED EDITION 2000 SHOWING THE LAW AS AT 31ST DECEMBER, 2000 This is a revised edition of the law, prepared by the Law Revision Commissioner under the authority of the
More informationMade available by Sabinet REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA EXPROPRIATION BILL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA EXPROPRIATION BILL (As introduced in the National Assembly (proposed section 76); explanatory summary of Bill published in Government Gazette No. 38418 of 26 January 1) (The English
More informationPORTIONS OF ILLINOIS FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER ACT 735 ILCS 5/9-101 et. seq.
Sec. 9-102. When action may be maintained. (a) The person entitled to the possession of lands or tenements may be restored thereto under any of the following circumstances: (1) When a forcible entry is
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE JOHN LEWIS
ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CIVIL SUIT NO.88 OF 1999 BETWEEN: FITZROY MC KREE Plaintiff and JOHN LEWIS Appearances: Paula David for the Plaintiff John Bayliss Frederick for
More informationClinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University
Clinical negligence by Marc Cornock Senior Lecturer Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Address: Faculty of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care The Open University Horlock Building
More informationNo. 11/1990: LOCAL GOVERNMENT (PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1990 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY PART II COMPENSATION GENERALLY
No. 11/1990: LOCAL GOVERNMENT (PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1990 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title, collective citation and construction. 2. Interpretation. 3. Repeals
More informationAdjudication Claim Dated [insert date]
Under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 IN THE MATTER of an Adjudication BETWEEN ABC CONSTRUCTION LTD Claimant AND JOHN DOE Respondent [AND JANE DOE] [Owner] (only relevant to an adjudication brought
More informationTrials and Tribulations of Shooting a Water Well. by Wes Bender
Trials and Tribulations of Shooting a Water Well by Wes Bender In the spring of 1987 I got a call from a well driller who had some serious problems. He had set off explosives in a well in an attempt to
More informationTWO NOTES ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING 'PROXIMITY' IN NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS PROXIMITY AND NEGLIGENT ADVICE THE SAN SEBASTIAN CASE
TWO NOTES ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING 'PROXIMITY' IN NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS PROXIMITY AND NEGLIGENT ADVICE THE SAN SEBASTIAN CASE Alex Bruce* 1. Introduction In November 1986, the High Court handed down
More informationProfiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors
Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors Author: Tim Wardell Special Counsel Edwards Michael Lawyers Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working
More information02-Dec The legal environment. The legal environment. The Auditor s Legal Liability
The Auditor s Legal Liability The legal environment Litigation related to alleged audit failures have caused some concern in the profession The requirement to hold a practising certificate imposes an obligation
More informationJOHNSON COUNTY CODE OF REGULATIONS FOR PRIVATE INFILTRATION AND INFLOW 2010 EDITION
JOHNSON COUNTY CODE OF REGULATIONS FOR PRIVATE INFILTRATION AND INFLOW 2010 EDITION Johnson County Wastewater 11811 S. Sunset Drive, Suite 2500 Olathe, KS 66061-7061 (913) 715-8500 INDEX CHAPTER 1 POLICY
More informationLUCAS COUNTY SANITARY ENGINEER BUILDING SEWERS AND CONNECTIONS RULES AND REGULATIONS
LUCAS COUNTY SANITARY ENGINEER BUILDING SEWERS AND CONNECTIONS RULES AND REGULATIONS Section 1. All sewers or sewer improvements that have been constructed or sewers or sewer improvements hereinafter constructed
More informationCHAPTER 196 WATER AND SEWERAGE CORPORATION WATER SUPPLY RULES
[CH.196 3 CHAPTER 196 1 WATER SUPPLY RULES (SECTION 39) [Commencement 29th June, 1953] 1. These Rules may be cited as the Water Supply Rules. 2. In these Rules, unless the context otherwise requires consumer
More information