![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales High Court (Technology and Construction Court) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Technology and Construction Court) Decisions >> Moore & Anor v National Westminster Bank [2018] EWHC 1805 (TCC) (17 July 2018) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2018/1805.html Cite as: [2018] EWHC 1805 (TCC) |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
BIRMINGHAM DISTRICT REGISTRY and APPEAL CENTRE
ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT BIRMINGHAM
TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT
Mr Recorder Willetts,
Claim NoD50BM001
The Priory Courts 33 Bull Street, Birmingham |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
(1) ![]() ![]() ![]() (2) ![]() |
Respondents |
|
- and - |
||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | Appellant |
____________________
Emily Betts (instructed by Wright Hassall) for the Respondents
Hearing dates: 28th June 2018
____________________
VERSION
OF JUDGMENT APPROVED
Crown Copyright ©
Mr Justice Birss :
Diminution in value
or cost of repair?
"I preferred the evidence of Mr Northridge to that of Mr Davies for the reasons I gave. Accordingly if I was wrong not to apply Wattsv
Morrow there would be no basis for an award less than the cost of repair in any event. There being no contrary evidence on the cost of remedial works required and therefore the court would be left with no other practical indicator as to what would amount to a reasonable estimate of the diminution in
value
but the quantified cost of repair, which in my judgment would lead to the same conclusion (the Steward
v
Rapley approach)."
[second judgment paragraph 8(iii)]
"in any event the approach urged on me by the defendant would leave the claimants inadequately compensated for a transaction they would, in my judgment, not have entertained but for the defendant's breach of contact."
Conclusion