In Supershield Ltd v Siemens Building Technologies FE Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 7, the dispute related to work undertaken under a contract for the installation of a sprinkler system in a new office building. Siemens had sub-contracted some of the work to Supershield; but Siemens themselves were in the project as a sub-contractor to the upstream mechanical and electrical contractors. The system was designed to be resilient: if water overflowed from the storage tank, there were drains in the floor that should ensure that there was no flooding beyond the tank room. Unfortunately, when a nut and bolt connection on a float valve in the tank failed, leading to water overflowing from the tank, the drains failed to act as a failsafe because they became blocked with packaging, insulating and other material on the tank room floor. The water that escaped from the tank room reached electrical equipment in the basement of the building causing extensive damage. Siemens, having settled the claims made by the upstream parties, now sought to pass on the agreed liability to Supershield, who had the contractual responsibility for the fixing of the nut and bolt connection. One of the points taken by Supershield was that [...].
Answer
the damage that resulted from the overflow was too remote
Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In Supershield Ltd v Siemens Building Technologies FE Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 7, the dispute related to work undertaken under a contract for the installation of a sprinkler system in a new office building. Siemens had sub-contracted some of the work to Supershield; but Siemens themselves were in the project as a sub-contractor to the upstream mechanical and electrical contractors. The system was designed to be resilient: if water overflowed from the storage tank, there were drains in the floor that should ensure that there was no flooding beyond the tank room. Unfortunately, when a nut and bolt connection on a float valve in the tank failed, leading to water overflowing from the tank, the drains failed to act as a failsafe because they became blocked with packaging, insulating and other material on the tank room floor. The water that escaped from the tank room reached electrical equipment in the basement of the building causing extensive damage. Siemens, having settled the claims made by the upstream parties, now sought to pass on the agreed liability to Supershield, who had the contractual responsibility for the fixing of the nut and bolt connection. One of the points taken by Supershield was that [...].
Answer
?
Tags
#contract #law #remedies
Question
In Supershield Ltd v Siemens Building Technologies FE Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 7, the dispute related to work undertaken under a contract for the installation of a sprinkler system in a new office building. Siemens had sub-contracted some of the work to Supershield; but Siemens themselves were in the project as a sub-contractor to the upstream mechanical and electrical contractors. The system was designed to be resilient: if water overflowed from the storage tank, there were drains in the floor that should ensure that there was no flooding beyond the tank room. Unfortunately, when a nut and bolt connection on a float valve in the tank failed, leading to water overflowing from the tank, the drains failed to act as a failsafe because they became blocked with packaging, insulating and other material on the tank room floor. The water that escaped from the tank room reached electrical equipment in the basement of the building causing extensive damage. Siemens, having settled the claims made by the upstream parties, now sought to pass on the agreed liability to Supershield, who had the contractual responsibility for the fixing of the nut and bolt connection. One of the points taken by Supershield was that [...].
Answer
the damage that resulted from the overflow was too remote
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it settled the claims made by the upstream parties, now sought to pass on the agreed liability to Supershield, who had the contractual responsibility for the fixing of the nut and bolt connection. One of the points taken by Supershield was that <span>the damage that resulted from the overflow was too remote.<span><body><html>
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.