Cases - Clayton v Woodman
Record details
- Name
- Clayton v Woodman
- Date
- [1962]
- Citation
- 2 QB 533
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Contract administration
- Summary
-
The Court of Appeal considered the extent to which the architect owes a duty of care to a building contractor. Building contractors contracted with a hospital board under an RIBA contract to install a new lift shaft at a hospital. The work was to be supervised by the architects but it was the builders' job to design the manner in which the works were to be carried out and to make all necessary provisions for shoring-up the building during the work.
The architect was asked by the building contractor to consider varying the works to include the demolition of an existing wall. The architect rejected the request. The wall later collapsed, seriously injuring the contractor.
The Court of Appeal rejected the suggestion that the architect was liable in negligence to the builder. The architect would have been in breach of his duty to the employer if he had decided to approve the demolition of the existing wall. The architect did not instruct the builder to do anything he knew to be dangerous. It was a matter for the contractor to determine a safe way of carrying out the works.
The position would have been different if the architect had usurped the role of the contractor and given instructions as to how to carry out the works (rather than merely rejecting a request for a variation).