Cases - Bowmer & Kirkland Ltd. v Wilson Bowden Properties Ltd

Record details

Name

Bowmer & Kirkland Ltd. v Wilson Bowden Properties Ltd

Date

(1996)

Citation

CILL 1157

Keywords

Construction - defects - implied terms

Summary

In this case the contractor carried out the works as specified, but this resulted in defects and the building not being fit for its intended use and the cost of remedial works was over £1m on a build cost of £2.9m.

The contractor argued that the defects should have been apparent to the architect during the contract; and suggested the Architect had a duty to supervise the works including the quality, negating their poor workmanship. The court decided the contractor was misconceived and that under the JCT Contract, there was no duty for the Architect to supervise the works, and it was the contractor's responsibility to maintain standards.

The court also considered if the materials, products and workmanship are fully defined in a specification. They concluded if the contractor carried out the works in accordance with the specification then they had complied with their obligations under the contract. However, based on the 1992 case of Lindenberg v Canning, the contractor did owe a duty to warn the employer if the specification included obvious errors or was unbuildable.