As panel solicitors for the Royal Incorporation of Architects in
Scotland Insurance Scheme we are regularly instructed to defend and
resolve claims against architects, and are experienced in
disciplinary hearings brought against architects. We are also
recognised for our experience in acting for consulting engineers,
design and build contractors, quantity surveyors and project
managers.
As our construction practice is long established, we are very
experienced in all means of resolving disputes for our clients,
including litigation, arbitration, mediation and, more recently, adjudication.
Recent cases include:
Albert Bartlett & Sons (Airdrie) Limited -v-
Gilchrist & Lynn Limited [2009] CSOH 125. We
acted for one of the third parties in the successful defence
focussing on the application of a cheaper remedial scheme, being
the application of a product known as Kemperol whereas the pursuer
was seeking an overcladding solution, which would involve draining
the skylights in the roof and thereafter installing over the
existing roof cladding a properly fixed single ply profiled roof
sheet. Having heard the evidence and considered matters the
judge took the view that a successful litigant cannot insist on
damages measured on the basis of an unreasonably expensive or
grossly disproportionate remedial scheme, and he remains under a
duty to mitigate his loss. In the circumstances he accepted
that Kemperol was an appropriate solution.
Langstane Housing v Riverside Construction & Others
(2009). We acted on behalf of architects defending a
multimillion pound case which arose from the collapse of a
commercial building in Aberdeen. The claim against his clients was
ultimately abandoned.
Howes v Crombie (2001). We acted on behalf of
an engineer who issued a certificate purporting to verify the
construction of a bespoke house.
An action against him by the first purchaser of the property was
successfully defended on the basis that no duty of care had been
owed to them by the engineer.