Cases - Tate & Lyle v GLC
Record details
- Name
- Tate & Lyle v GLC
- Date
- [1982]
- Citation
- 1 WLR 149
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Construction claim - loss and expense claim - damages - head of loss - valuation - quantification - written documentation - speculation
- Summary
-
The defendant authority entered into a contract to construct 2 new piers for the Woolwich ferry in East London in close proximity to the claimant's business premises. Prior to the building works, riparian access was provided to the business premises by barge moorings, which were rendered unusable as a result of heavy silt deposits occasioned by the two new piers.
The claimants alleged that they had spent considerable time from both a management and supervisory perspective in dealing with the defendant's failure to dredge away the silt deposits. The claimants sought to recover such costs from the defendant.
Forbes J held that there was evidence that managerial time was spent on dealing with remedial measures and rearranging berthing schedules to enable the delivery of sugar, and that the same could properly form the head of special damage.
However, he went on to warn that such a head of loss was 'extremely difficult to quantify' and, in the absence of timesheets or written records, no recovery was permissible. Forbes J declined to 'follow Admiralty practice and award a percentage on the damages', stating that to do so would be 'pure speculation'.
Therefore, it is probable that a 'percentage-based' approach will also not suffice to prove a disruption claim.