Key Point
- Recovery for cost of reinstatement is subject to a reasonableness test of whether the cost of reinstatement is all out of proportion to the loss suffered.
Facts
Background
- Building contractors (C) agreed to build a swimming pool for D in his garden.
- Instead of building it to a depth of 7’6 as stipulated in the contract, it was built to 6’9.
- The pool was safe for swimming and the resale value of the home was not affected by the breach.
Dispute
- When D refused to pay, C sued for the contract price.
- D counterclaimed for the cost to increase the pool depth to 7’6 which amounted to £21,500, around a third of the total price of the pool.
- Trial judge granted a £2,500 for loss of amenity.
- The Court of Appeal granted £21,500 for cost of cure.
Membership Required
Sign up to read the rest and gain access to the following features:
2000+ members-only CasesArticle SummariesNotesLegislation AnalysesModel AnswersFlashcardsSQE MCQsLLB MCQsAI ChatDark ModeShop discount
Join NowAlready a member? Log in here