A mother and daughter who purchased two Liverpool flats, only to be plagued with damp that rendered the properties “uninhabitable”, have successfully challenged a ruling that their claim against the developers had been brought outside the limitation period.
In a landmark ruling, the Court of Appeal has held that developers attempting to remedy such problems run the risk of extending the six-year time limit that housebuyers have in which to sue over defects. The court said that unsuccessful remedial works can create a new cause of action and thereby renew the limitation period.
In January 1995, Hilda Alderson and her daughter, Avril, each purchased a basement flat in a newly developed property in Livingstone Drive North, Liverpool, for around £48,000. Both properties had allegedly suffered from damp before the Aldersons had even moved in, but they did not bring legal proceedings against Beetham Organisation Ltd until January 2001.
In Liverpool High Court, Deputy Judge Mackay struck out the claim, ruling that any defective development work that might have given rise to a cause of action had been completed in May 1994. The claimants were therefore outside the six-year time limit.
In the Court of Appeal, however, Aldous, Judge and Longmore LJJ have unanimously held that the Aldersons are entitled to sue the developer because unsuccessful remedial works attempted in May 1995 gave rise to a separate cause of action for which the time limit had not expired.
Judge LJ said that that the decision made “good practical sense”.
He stated: “On occasion, defects in the building will not emerge until close to the expiry of the limitation period, and arranging and completing any necessary remedial work will be time-consuming.
“As an alternative to immediate litigation, the person to whom a duty is owed may agree that the original builder or craftsman should remedy the defect, without running any risks in relation to limitation periods.”
Alderson and another v Beetham Organisation Ltd Court of Appeal (Aldous, Judge and Longmore LJJ) 2 April 2003.
Kevin Musaheb (instructed by DP Hardy & Co, of Liverpool) appeared for the appellants; Antony Edwards-Stuart QC and Ian Swan (instructed by Bullivant Jones, of Liverpool) appeared for the respondent.
References: PLS News 2/4/03
