Collateral warranties are just waiting to be broken
Series: Architects' Journal ; 220(1) 1 July 2004, 48(1)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Summary: Discusses "Northern and Shell Plc v John Laing Construction Ltd" ([2003] EWCA Civ 1035, [2004] 90 Con LR 26) where building defects took eleven and a half years to appear. The new owner Northern (N) claimed on the warranty, but John Laing said the claim was out of time as the warranty ran from the date of practical completion. However, N argued it ran from the date of the contract some eight months later. CA agreed the parties intended the warranty to run from the completion date, which made it within the 12 year limitation period. Defines the purpose of a warranty to have a retrospective effect, even when a building changes hands.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS67986 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 126804-1001 |
Discusses "Northern and Shell Plc v John Laing Construction Ltd" ([2003] EWCA Civ 1035, [2004] 90 Con LR 26) where building defects took eleven and a half years to appear. The new owner Northern (N) claimed on the warranty, but John Laing said the claim was out of time as the warranty ran from the date of practical completion. However, N argued it ran from the date of the contract some eight months later. CA agreed the parties intended the warranty to run from the completion date, which made it within the 12 year limitation period. Defines the purpose of a warranty to have a retrospective effect, even when a building changes hands.