Tinseltime Limited v Eryl Roberts and others

Citation: BLR 515 (TCC) and [2011] EWHC 1199 (TCC)

Nature of case:
Tinseltime, anassignee to a dissolved company, maintained a claim for damages for negligence and/or in nuisance againstRoberts, an independent contractor. The claim was intended to encompass all who might through their relationship with Roberts and the works in question, have a liability in tort for damage to the premises and /or machinery.Tinseltime alleged that the general principle that a defendant is liable for the negligence of his independent contractor where the activities are “ultra-hazardous” and “exceptionally dangerous” is not applicable to a claim in nuisance. Dismissing this submission, the court held that there was no justification for holding that the scope of the exception was different in nuisance than negligence.

Link to Judgment 

Counsel

Richard Coplin

  • Share