“House of Lords creates broad two-stage test for duty of care”
The defendants were lessees of maisonettes in a block where structural movement occurred due to inadequate foundations. Merton Council had approved the foundation plans and inspected the foundations during construction, but the foundations were built to insufficient depth contrary to building regulations.
Whether a local authority owes a duty of care to subsequent purchasers of property in respect of their building control functions, and what test should apply for establishing duty of care in negligence.
The House of Lords held that Merton Council owed a duty of care to the flat owners. A two-stage test was established: first, whether there is sufficient proximity for a prima facie duty of care, and second, whether there are policy considerations that should negate or limit that duty.
This case dramatically expanded the scope of negligence liability and the circumstances in which a duty of care could be found, until it was later restricted by Caparo Industries v Dickman.
You're reading the free summary of Anns v Merton London Borough Council. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978] AC 728 (HL)
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.