By Andrew Steele - 8 May 2013
In December 2011 we published a blog in relation to the High
Court's ruling that an appeal from the Weathertight Homes Tribunal
could not proceed to the Court of Appeal following its dismissal in
the High Court. Mr and Mrs Osborne's pursuit for justice in
their claim will now take them to the Supreme Court as they have
recently been granted leave to appeal to that court.
The Supreme Court granted leave on 1 May 2013 for consideration
of the following questions:
- Is the Court of Appeal's interpretation of section 14(a) of the
Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 correct?
- Given the dismissal by the High Court of the appeal against the
removal order, does section 95(2) of that Act preclude the granting
of any remedy to the Applicants?
We await with interest the interpretation that the highest Court
in the land will give to this crucial first question of when a
house is "built" for the purposes of the WHRS legislation.
Many owners find themselves on the cusp of eligibility depending on
when inspections were called and when Code Compliance Certificates
were granted. Some further clarity on these issues would be
welcome.
Leaky building cases are often very high value claims.
They throw up complex questions of law in negligence, contract and
trust law, to name but a few. It will be interesting to see
if, after considering the second question above, the Supreme Court
agree that the possibility of obtaining any remedy is exhausted
following the unsuccessful appeal to the High Court.
Related Article
High Court the court of last resort for leaky home
owners
Contact
Leaky
building team