What aspect of Tort Law would the following fall under?

ClayCarter

Hey folks, would like to know out of curiosity what aspect of tort law the following falls into:

House A sells land to the rear of house to Builder X. A two story dwelling is built on the land (House . House A's sewer line passes underneath house B in order to connect to the main sewer line to the rear of both houses. Aprox. 14 years later and it transpires that part of the foundations of house B has subsided and damaged the sewer.

Is this an act of tresspass? Who is culpable? The date of knowledge is one month ago, so presumably the statute of limitations will not prevent action against the builder by the proprietor of house A?

Just to note- no this is not a first year tort assignment and hence a request to do my homework.:D

Victor

After 14 years, I think its a matter of suck it up for the two householders and their insurers.

If it was less (than 6 years?), householder A may have a cause of action against his solicitor (for allowing the builder build over the sewer) and the builder (for building over the sewer).

Householder A might have a cause against householder B.

Householder B would have a cause against the builder.

ClayCarter

Cheers Victor. I would have thought that house A would have a case against builder X. I presumed the time limit would be irrelevant because it starts from the date on which the cause of action took place. And the cause took place on the recent collapse of the foundation as a result of the negligent construction?

Victor

I think that only applies to personal injury case and the like, but I'll defer to the (your?) solicitors.

Over time buildings do deteriorate.

ClayCarter

Victor wrote: »

I think that only applies to personal injury case and the like, but I'll defer to the (your?) solicitors.

Over time buildings do deteriorate.

True. Yeah i will get onto my solicitor but wanted to have an idea of what im dealing with first. Slightly embarrassing as a masters law student going into a prospective employer not having a clue!:eek:

Cheers for the help

dats_right

Victor wrote: »

If it was less (than 6 years?), householder A may have a cause of action against his solicitor (for allowing the builder build over the sewer)

A solicitor's only responsibility is to ensure a good title is acquired. This DOES NOT extend to construction of the property, save that if the solicitor is required to certify title to a bank (in the case of a mortgage) he/she would insist on obtaining architect's certificates of compliance with planning permission and building regs. A solicitor is not qualified to look behind the veracity or accuracy of an architect's certificate and will accept it at face value. It is therefore almost inconceivable that any cause of action could exist against a solicitor in these circumstances.

I have been involved in similar building contract cases in the past and usually liability will aportion between architect and builder.

ClayCarter

dats_right wrote: »

I have been involved in similar building contract cases in the past and usually liability will aportion between architect and builder.

Have any of those cases been similar to mine timewise? my only doubt is whether my case will be barred as a result of the time since construction. But as i said, the cause of the action only happened recently.

dats_right

ClayCarter wrote: »

my only doubt is whether my case will be barred as a result of the time since construction. But as i said, the cause of the action only happened recently.

The limitation period for actions arising in tort, other than claims for damages for negligence, nuisance or breach of duty in respect of personal injury, is six years from the date of accrual of the right of action (per section 11(2) 1957 Act). In such cases the limitation period begins to run when the damage has been caused by the defendant's wrongful act even where the plaintiff is unaware of the damage. The plaintiff's date of knowledge of the right of action is only relevant for claims for personal injuries as specified in section of the 1991 Act.

dermot_sheehan

If you're looking up law on the statute of limitations and latent defects, O'Donnell v Kil-
saran Concrete Limited [2001] 4 IR 183 might be of assitance

ClayCarter

Cheers - i will look up O'Donnell this evening when i get a chance.

Victor

dats_right wrote: »

A solicitor's only responsibility is to ensure a good title is acquired. This DOES NOT extend to construction of the property, save that if the solicitor is required to certify title to a bank (in the case of a mortgage) he/she would insist on obtaining architect's certificates of compliance with planning permission and building regs. A solicitor is not qualified to look behind the veracity or accuracy of an architect's certificate and will accept it at face value. It is therefore almost inconceivable that any cause of action could exist against a solicitor in these circumstances.

I have been involved in similar building contract cases in the past and usually liability will aportion between architect and builder.

What if the vendor's solicitor failed to ensure a protected way-leave for the drain, which would be prudent?