Proper contract execution is vital

Theresa mohammed bw 2018

Theresa Mohammed on a reminder to be express in the scope and terms of appointments and to properly execute contract documents

Following the onset of the building safety reforms, there has been a renewed interest in claims for defective works and claims against professional consultants. The application of the Defective Premises Act 1972 (DPA) has been of particular interest due to substantial extensions to the limitation period coupled with the lack of recent judicial interpretation.

In this context, the recent case of Vainker & Another vs Marbank Construction Ltd & Others [2024] is a welcome addition and sheds some light on claims being made against a contractor or professional consultant pursuant to the DPA. It is also another example of a home owner who is prepared to enter litigation territory seeking compensation.

The claim arose out of the construction of a residential property: Croft at Walpole Gardens, Strawberry Hill, Twickenham. The contractor was Marbank, and the building was largely designed by the architecture practice SCd. Practical completion was certified on 15 May 2014, but the legal proceedings were not commenced until 4 May 2020.

This is PREMIUM content, available to subscribers only

You are not currently logged in. Subscribers may LOGIN here.

SUBSCRIBE to access this story

Gated access promo

SUBSCRIBE for UNLIMITED access to news and premium content

A subscription will provide access to the latest industry news, expert analysis & comment from industry leaders,  data and research - including our popular annual league tables. You will receive:

  • Print/digital issues delivered to your door/inbox
  • Unlimited access to including our archive
  • Print/digital supplements
  • Newsletters - unlimited access to the stories behind the headlines

Subscribe now 


Get access to premium content subscribe today