Cases - Worboys v Acme Investments Ltd

Record details

Name

Worboys v Acme Investments Ltd

Date

[1969]

Citation

4 BLR 136, CA

Keywords

Expert witness

Summary

In this case, clients alleged professional negligence against an architect. The clients called as expert a surveyor who gave evidence about what the cost of remedial work should have been. The court held that there was no evidence to support a finding of professional negligence. Counsel for the clients argued that:

'this is a class of case in which the court can find a breach of professional duty without having before it the standard type of evidence as to what constitutes lack of care on the part of a professional man in the relevant circumstances'.

The court rejected this argument:

'There may well be cases in which it would be not necessary to adduce such evidence - as, for instance, if an architect omitted to provide a front door to the premises. But it would be grossly unfair to architects if, on a point of the type now under consideration, which relates to a special type of dwelling, the courts could without the normal evidence condemn a professional man.'

The then editors of the Building Law Reports commented on this case that:

'... the evidence should normally come from someone who is of equal experience or standing to the professional man in question, although evidence from a person who is acquainted with the standards may also suffice. For example, if the issue relates to a matter of structural design, evidence from a structural engineer may well be acceptable as to the standards of an architect who has undertaken the structural design'.

(But see on this last point Sansom v Metcalfe Hambleton.)