The way forward to tort recovery of pure economic loss for defective premises in the UK

Q4 Social Sciences International Journal of Private Law Pub Date : 2013-06-24 DOI:10.1504/IJPL.2013.054771
Sandy Sabapathy
{"title":"The way forward to tort recovery of pure economic loss for defective premises in the UK","authors":"Sandy Sabapathy","doi":"10.1504/IJPL.2013.054771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current tort law in the UK is averse to the recovery of pure economic loss for defective dwellings for reasons which are unconvincing and unsustainable, especially in relation to a subsequent purchaser of a house which has dangerous structural defects. Thus, a legitimate claimant is deprived of a remedy in tort without valid justifications. This paper aims to evaluate and analyse the relevant legislation namely the Defective Premises Act 1972 (the DPA) and the Latent Damage Act 1986 (the LDA) in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in Murphy v Brentwood DistrictCouncil [1999] 1 AC 398. As a solution, the paper will stress on the need to amend the DPA and the LDA as a positive way forward to change this arena of tort law which is unduly stringent and restrictive.","PeriodicalId":39023,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Private Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Private Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPL.2013.054771","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current tort law in the UK is averse to the recovery of pure economic loss for defective dwellings for reasons which are unconvincing and unsustainable, especially in relation to a subsequent purchaser of a house which has dangerous structural defects. Thus, a legitimate claimant is deprived of a remedy in tort without valid justifications. This paper aims to evaluate and analyse the relevant legislation namely the Defective Premises Act 1972 (the DPA) and the Latent Damage Act 1986 (the LDA) in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in Murphy v Brentwood DistrictCouncil [1999] 1 AC 398. As a solution, the paper will stress on the need to amend the DPA and the LDA as a positive way forward to change this arena of tort law which is unduly stringent and restrictive.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国瑕疵房屋纯经济损失侵权赔偿之路
英国现行的侵权法反对对有缺陷住房的纯经济损失进行赔偿,理由是不令人信服和不可持续的,特别是在涉及到随后购买具有危险结构缺陷的房屋的情况下。因此,一个合法的索赔人在没有正当理由的情况下被剥夺了侵权救济。本文旨在根据上议院在Murphy v Brentwood DistrictCouncil [1999] 1 AC 398中的决定,评估和分析相关立法,即1972年的《瑕疵房屋法》(DPA)和1986年的《潜在损害法》(LDA)。作为解决方案,本文将强调有必要修改DPA和LDA,作为改变这一侵权法领域过度严格和限制的积极途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
The evolution of the non-oral modification clause Legal regulation of migration policy in EU countries: current challenges The application of the concept of consideration to smart contracts on a blockchain. The propriety of mandatory arbitration in Nigeria vis-à-vis the doctrine of voluntariness: the imperativeness of charting a new course The evolution of the non-oral modification clause
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1