Cases - Beaumont v Humberts

Record details

Name

Beaumont v Humberts

Date

[1989]; [1990]

Citation

2 EGLR 171; 2 EGLR 166, CA

Keywords

Negligence in valuations and surveys

Summary

The claimant, who was in the process of purchasing a Grade II listed house, parts of which were 300 years old, relied on the mortgage valuation report prepared by the defendant surveyors, which included an opinion of the property's value 'for insurance reinstatement purposes'. Some 18 months after the purchase the house was almost entirely destroyed by fire, whereupon the claimant alleged that, due to the negligence of the defendants in providing this figure, he was left substantially under-insured. On the facts, a majority of the Court of Appeal held that the defendants had not been negligent.

However, in the present context the case is interesting for the conflicting views expressed by the judges on the question of whether the word 'reinstatement' in this context meant exact replication of the existing structure, the provision of a modern house offering equivalent accommodation, or something in between these two meanings. The answer the Court gave was that it meant a house in the same shape and style as the original, that is, something in between.