Rendlesham Estates Plc & Ors v Barr Ltd

In this Technology and Construction Court judgment by Mr. Justice Edwards-Stuart, 120 apartment owners at Concord Street, Leeds brought a claim against Barr, the contractor engaged by developer City Wall Limited (CWC), under the Defective Premises Act 1972. Barr had been selected to meet budget by reducing specification and using steel framing, and after completion widespread defects emerged: the intercom system largely failed, walkways flooded and iced, roof and glazing detailing permitted water ingress, external walls lacked continuous insulation/vapour control, shower installations leaked causing damp and mould, and internal partitions/doors compromised fire safety. With CWC later in administration and owners lacking privity, the claim proceeded under DPA s1 seeking substantial remedial works, testing key issues of the Act’s scope (definition of “dwelling,” coverage of work “in connection with” provision of dwellings), representative proceedings under CPR 19.6, and damages measurement. The court held that each apartment (and possibly its balcony) is the dwelling; common parts are not, but work to them is “in connection with” provision of each dwelling. Barr was found liable for numerous defects rendering flats unfit at completion, requiring full replacement of reversed glazing and roofs, and repairs to walkways, intercoms, shower installations, and external walls, while claims about fire stairs, Mansafe and pipe insulation failed. Damages were measured by the full cost necessary to make flats fit for habitation, not limited to service charge shares, with mechanisms to avoid double recovery and awards for blight and distress.