This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

InvercargillCity Council v Hamlin [1996] AC 624

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 04/01/2024 07:04

Judgement for the case InvercargillCity Council v Hamlin

Table Of Contents

  • Plaintiff employed X to build a house and the local council’s inspector, Defendant, failed to point out defective foundations.

  • These were discovered when Plaintiff called in an expert and Plaintiff sued Defendant for the cost of repairs.

  • Privy Council conceded that the NZ law, unlike English courts, does impose a duty of care on inspectors and upheld the verdict that Plaintiff could not have discovered the defects reasonably before calling in the expert and therefore his cause of action accrued from this moment.

  • There were no special limitations in NZ law on economic loss.

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on InvercargillCity Council v Hamlin

Tort Law Notes
1,070 total pages
853 purchased

Tort Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridg...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started

Related Product Samples

These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.

Tort LawNegligence Law Notes (20 pages)
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Tort Law Notes
1,070 total pages
853 purchased

Tort Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridg...