Cases - Great Eastern Hotel Co Ltd v John Laing Co Ltd

Record details

Name
Great Eastern Hotel Co Ltd v John Laing Co Ltd
Date
[2005]; [2005];
Citation
EWHC 181 (TCC); 99 Con LR 45 TCC
Legislation
Keywords
Expert witness - construction claims
Summary

In this case an alleged breach of obligation by the defendant construction manager was the subject of an action by the clients.

The defendants advanced the argument that the claimant's case ought to fail as it was unable to demonstrate the causal nexus between major breaches of contract and particular loss and damage. HHJ Wilcox ruled:

'I am satisfied that the Trade Contractor accounts are global claims, and if such a claim is to succeed, GEH must eliminate from the causes of the loss and expense element all matters which are not the responsibility of Laing. That requirement is mitigated in this case, because it was not possible to identify a causal link between particular events for which Laing was responsible, and the individual items of loss. Such an analysis was approved by the Court of Session Inner House in John Doyle Construction Limited v Laing Management (Scotland) Limited ... I am satisfied ... that the dominant cause of Trade Contractor delay was in fact the delay to the project caused by Laing's proven breaches.'

The judge also criticised the evidence of the defendants' expert witness as:

'lacking in thoroughness in his research and unreliable by reason of his uncritical acceptance of the favourable accounts put forward by Laing'.

The judge especially remarked on the expert's failure to revise his opinion in the light of facts subsequently becoming apparent.

[2005] 99 Con LR 45 TCC

This case has been considered above in the context of 'global' claims. A further decision of HHJ Wilcox QC, the Court again lambasted a computerised critical path analysis program as the same was based on milestone dates which did not exist, and had simply been identified retrospectively once the project was completed.