A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
In the Court of Appeal case, seven of nine heads of loss were struck out as remote or speculative, with the court emphasising that a schedule cannot be used to sneak in new causes of action. Robust case management, the judges made clear, means killing hopeless claims early rather than letting them limp towards trial.
Gold also distils key guidance on damages for defective works, reaffirming that reinstatement costs usually prevail, but diminution in value still has a role where repairs are disproportionate. The article sits alongside updates to family procedure rules, including reforms to how allegations of domestic abuse are structured and assessed.
RELATED ARTICLES
