A sound decision, as it seems to me (the suggestion of the claimant being, in effect, that the existence of a contract between him and the defendant builder almost automatically went to create a duty in tort as well -- which can't be right). I also liked Jackson LJ's throwaway line in his judgment referring to the 1970s and 1980s as having been a "heroic age" of the law of torts.

Andrew




On 18/01/11 12:57, Morgan P. wrote:

Dear List Members,

The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has today handed down a decision that analyses concurrent liability in contract and tort, in the context of a defective building: James Andrew Robinson v. P E Jones (Contractors) Ltd, http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/9.html.

The case looks at the role of assumption of responsibility, economic loss, and discusses the different origins and functions of tortious and contractual duties.  It also comments on the Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977, upholding in the context of economic loss, a term of term of a contract with a consumer which limits liability to contractual liability only (based on the National House-Building Council’s standard form of Agreement), and excludes a claim in tort.

Kind regards,

__________________________

Phillip Morgan
Lecturer in Contract and Tort Law
Senior Tutor (Year 2)
School of Law
University of Southampton
Highfield
Southampton SO17 1BJ
Phillip.Morgan@soton.ac.uk

http://www.law.soton.ac.uk/
http://www.soton.ac.uk/law/staff/academicstaff/morgan_phillip.html