Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in contract dispute arising from alleged defective construction of a dwelling house, orders specific performance of the Building Agreement in order to allow work - including the replacement of the roof - to be carried out; and the court rules that the builders are liable for the cost of the purchaser's rent of an alternative accommodation.
Contract law - damages for breach of contract, negligence and breach of duty arising out of the purchase of a dwelling house - Building Agreement was in the form of an agreement combining the standard Law Society Contract for sale, 2001 Edition and the standard form Building Agreement issued jointly by the Law Society of Ireland and Construction Industry Federation - conclusion of the transaction the defendants also furnished to the plaintiffs the standard form of home bond documentation as security against defects in the construction of the dwellinghouse – soon after completing the purchase the purchasers experienced problems - contact with the site foreman to address the problems - frustrated by the continuing problems the purchasers emailed the builders – problems experienced – promised to carry out remedial works – confusion as to what was agreed - remedial works were not in fact undertaken – lull in activity – sons experienced respiratory problems - family moved out of the home – health improved out of the home - house was to blame for the illnesses being experienced by the children – report of consulting engineer – defects noted - removal of the roof - purchasers evidence – builders evidence – building contract requires them to make good any major defects within a period of eighteen months after the completion date - damages for breach of contract should be such as to place the person who has sustained a loss in the same situation – whether the purchasers mitigated their losses – recission claim abandoned - whether or not there is a necessity to replace the roof structure of the dwelling house in its entirety – builders argued that the appropriate remedy is in specific performance of the contract on certain items - submitted that they are contractually entitled to re-enter upon the premises to undertake works of remediation - the roof should be replaced – less costs if builders completed the works – appropriate supervision - removal of the roof will also have the added benefit of removing doubts about some of the other issues -costs of renting alternative accommodation – Court did not consider that an award of general damages is merited – Court makes order for specific performance of the Building Agreement, to be completed in a good and substantial and workmanlike manner in accordance with the specifications and plans.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.