Description
The Court of Appeal allows appeal against a finding that the relationship between a firm of surveyors and the owners of a shop was not sufficiently proximate to give rise duty of care to those injured by a falling sign.
The Appellant, a firm of surveyors, appealed against a decision that the Respondent, a company that fitted shop signs, was entitled to claim a contribution from A towards its liability in respect of a group of claimants who had been injured by a falling shop sign.
The Court of Appeal held that it was not sufficient to found liability merely on the basis that it was foreseeable that a member of the public would suffer some harm if the surveyor failed to spot a defect. Proximity between the parties was a necessary ingredient. The surveyor had been appointed by the landlord, not the shop owner, and it was to him that any duty was owed.
