Ian McGlinn v Waltham Contractors Ltd and Huw Thomas Associates and DJ Hartigan and Associates Ltd and Wilson Large and Partners (No 3) [electronic resource]

[2007] EWHC 149 (TCC), 21 February 2007. Claimant (M) brought proceedings for damages for breach of contract and/or negligence against the defendant building contractors (Watham), the architects (H), the engineers (D) and the quantity surveyors and so called project managers (WL). Following the completion of M's private residence, M had decided that the house was so badly designed and so badly built that he was entitled to demolish it and start again. M claimed he was entitled to damages by way of the actual cost of demolition and the estimated cost of rebuilding. M also submitted the defendants had carried out inadequate inspections. The defendants argued that M's decision to demolish the property was unreasonable and that damages should be based on the cost of the work necessary to repair the individual defects for which each defendant was liable. "Held": M was only entitled to damages for the cost of repair, rather than the costs of demolition and rebuilding, because the defects were aesthetic rather than structural and M had not acted reasonably in demolishing the building. See full judgment for decisions against each defendant.