Causation In Professional Negligence Claims

• Published date: 07 August 2023
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution, Professional Negligence
• Law Firm: Myerson Solicitors LLP
• Author: Myerson Solicitors LLP

To successfully bring a professional negligence claim, a claimant must be able to prove the following elements:

1. The professional owed them a duty of care;
2. The professional breached that duty of care; and
3. The breach caused them to suffer financial loss - this is referred to as causation.

A professional negligence claim will not succeed unless the claimant can establish all three elements.

The importance of factual evidence in demonstrating causation, even where there is an admission of negligence, was emphasised in the case of Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Another v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC).

Background to the claim

The claim was for professional negligence and breach of contract brought against a firm of consulting engineers, Canham Consulting Ltd (Canham).

The parties were involved in the construction of two PassivHaus blocks, referred to as Block A and Block B. PassivHaus is a type of timber and brickwork housing from Germany.

The defendant, Canham, designed the foundations of both blocks using pad foundations.

The claimants sought to recover the costs of demolishing and rebuilding the two blocks and other consequential losses for a total sum of '3.7 million.

The claimants claimed that both blocks had to be demolished and rebuilt due to significant foundation deficiencies.

Admission of negligence

Negligence played a very small role in the proceedings as Canham's design of the foundations was found to be negligent because the dowels, which were a key component of the foundations as they connected the beams and the pads, were missing.

There were also errors in the figures given for the bearing pressure of the foundations, and the drawings were not adequately labelled.

There was, therefore, an admission of negligence in this case.

Issues proving causation

Although the negligence of the defendant was beyond doubt and the claimant's claim was ultimately successful, the amount awarded to the claimant was nominal because the factual evidence did not support the claimant's assertion that Canham's negligent design of the foundations led to the two blocks needing to be demolished and rebuilt. Causation was therefore not established.

Neither were the claimants entitled to claim damages for breach of contract because it was not shown that the losses they were claiming flowed directly from Canham's breach.

In the case of Block A, Canham was not found...