- Contractor fails to prove materials were unfit for purpose (Tayside Contracts v D Geddes)
- Original news
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: A contractor’s claim that materials supplied to it were not of satisfactory quality, or fit for purpose, failed, as the Scottish court was not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that certain characteristics in the materials were responsible for failures on the project. Further, the court was unwilling to conclude that, by process of elimination, the materials must have in some way or another been the cause of the failures.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial