Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Lord Justice LAWTON, Lord Justice DILLON and Lord Justice NEILL ____________________
N T Hague QC and Keith Bush (instructed by Phillips & Buck, of Cardiff) appeared on behalf of the appellants; L J Blom-Cooper QC and J W Gaskell (instructed by Spicketts, of Pontypridd) represented the respondent. ____________________
He added that the problem was aggravated by the plaintiff's gas cooker and washing machine, presumably because these, when in use, would be sources of heat.
There was no evidence, however, to indicate any damage to or want of repair in the metal windows themselves or the concrete lintels or, indeed, any other part of the 'structure and exterior'.
The appeal was allowed. No order was made as to costs save for legal aid taxation of the respondent's costs. Leave to appeal to the House of Lords was refused.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
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.