Netto, A M (2001) Third party rights for latent defects in buildings. PhD thesis, King's College London, UK.
Abstract
Properties are intended for use over many years. The risk of a latent defect manifesting and resulting in damage to the property many years after it has been built is present in negligently constructed properties. The legal position in relation to the rights of an aggrieved property owner in the context of latent defects is highly complex and uncertain. Where the owner had employed the negligent party responsible for the latent defect, he would be able to sue him for breach of contract provided, the defect surfaces during the contractual liability period. If he had not, then the owner will face the uncertainty presented by the law of tort in relation to recovery for purely economic losses. The uncertainty is evident when the English position is contrasted with the other Commonwealth jurisdictions. Even if the purchaser had been assigned contractual rights against the negligent participant, he may face difficulty in enforcing those rights. In addition, the existing legislation providing property owners with rights for defective work does not appear to address latent defects which surface outside the contractual liability period. The legislation that does affect latent defects, however, presumes a common law right exists in the first place. Finally, even if property owners are allowed to succeed against the negligent party in law, the negligent party may become insolvent. This is particularly significant as it in effect leaves property owners with no real remedy.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | latent defects; law; legislation; liability; owner; third party rights; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | jurisdiction, liability, property owner, breach of contract, face, owner, legislation, purchaser, recovery |
| Subjects: | psychology, operations management, dispute resolution, sociology, liability law, legal systems |
| Topics: | Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here