header-logo header-logo

14 December 2012
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Negligence

Cleightonhills v Bembridge Marine Ltd [2012] EWHC 3449 (TCC); [2012] All ER (D) 32 (Dec)

In considering whether a duty of care was owed, particularly in a construction context involving duties owed by parties who were only involved at all by reason of the contracts which they had entered into, the court needed to consider the contractual context in which such parties were involved in the first place. The court needed to consider what the party owing the duty to the other was contractually engaged to do. It was always necessary to consider what the scope of a tortious duty of care was. That scope was primarily determinable by reference to what the party owing the duty was at least broadly employed to do or actually did. It did not follow that, simply because a party was in breach of the contract pursuant to which it was involved in the project in question, it would be in breach of a duty of care owed to someone who was not a party to that contract.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll