{"id":858218,"date":"2025-06-26T10:12:09","date_gmt":"2025-06-26T15:12:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/2025\/06\/26\/urs-vs-bdw-the-liability-shift-contractors-cant-ignore\/"},"modified":"2025-06-26T10:12:09","modified_gmt":"2025-06-26T15:12:09","slug":"urs-vs-bdw-the-liability-shift-contractors-cant-ignore","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/2025\/06\/26\/urs-vs-bdw-the-liability-shift-contractors-cant-ignore\/","title":{"rendered":"URS vs BDW: the liability shift contractors can\u2019t ignore"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Jonathan Carrington is a senior associate at law firm RPC<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

The Supreme Court\u2019s May judgment in <\/span>URS Corporation Ltd vs BDW Trading Ltd<\/span><\/i> marks a landmark moment for construction liability in the UK. It may increase the risk of future negligence, Defective Premises Act (DPA) and contribution claims \u2013 even long after buildings are completed or sold.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\u201cResponsibility for defective work may extend well beyond completion or sale\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Contractors and consultants can no longer rely on ownership transfer, time limits or silence as shields against liability. <\/span><\/p>\n

As statutory duties under building-safety law cannot be contracted out of, managing risk through contracts alone is now much harder. This judgment sends a clear message that those responsible for latent defects may face claims many years after the original work was done.<\/span><\/p>\n

At the heart of the dispute was whether BDW, a commercial property developer, could recover remediation costs from URS, the structural engineering consultant behind the original design. URS argued BDW voluntarily incurred these costs and suffered no legal loss. The Supreme Court rejected this, confirming there is no general \u201cvoluntariness\u201d rule that automatically bars recovery of repair costs. Whether BDW acted reasonably will be decided at trial, but the ruling significantly narrows the room for defendants to rely on such defences.<\/span><\/p>\n

The court added that it is \u201cstrongly arguable\u201d BDW had no real choice but to carry out repairs, given the serious safety risks to residents. This reinforces the idea that work done to prevent harm is likely to be seen as compelled, not voluntary \u2013 a point with major implications for future disputes, where professionals might otherwise try to argue costs were incurred voluntarily and therefore not recoverable.<\/span><\/p>\n

The decision also reinforces key statutory reforms under the Building Safety Act 2022. Section 135 extends limitation periods under the DPA from six to 15 years, including a 30-year retrospective period. Crucially, the court confirmed this extension applies not only to claims under the act but also to related negligence and contribution claims that rely on the same limitation periods. As a result, this effectively lengthens the window for bringing claims related to latent defects in dwellings, giving claimants a significantly extended timeframe to seek remedies.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This shift means that hidden construction faults, discovered many years after completion or sale, may still be actionable, catching many contractors and consultants unaware.<\/span><\/p>\n

Overlapping responsibilities\u00a0<\/span><\/h3>\n

Developers are not excluded from the protections or responsibilities of the DPA. The court clarified that they can both owe and be owed duties under the act. In this case, URS owed a duty to BDW, as the developer instructing the design work. This helps clarify how statutory and contractual responsibilities overlap in complex projects involving multiple parties, underlining the interconnected nature of liability in large-scale developments.<\/span><\/p>\n

The judgment also clarified contribution claims under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978. URS argued BDW had no standing to seek contribution because no formal claim or judgment had been brought against it by residents. The court disagreed. It held that BDW\u2019s decision to fund the repairs meant it had effectively compensated the homeowners and could therefore pursue a contribution from URS.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This expands the scope for contribution claims and highlights the exposure of professionals even in the absence of litigation.<\/span><\/p>\n

For contractors and consultants, the ruling is a timely reminder of the need to reassess liability exposure. Responsibility for defective work may extend well beyond completion or sale, and legal arguments around voluntariness, limitation or absence of direct claims may carry less weight. <\/span><\/p>\n

Now is a good moment for professionals to review their contracts, historic risk and insurance cover, especially given longer liability tails and current conditions in the professional indemnity market.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Related Articles<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n

Read More<\/a>
\n Contributor<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jonathan Carrington is a senior associate at law firm RPC The Supreme Court\u2019s May judgment in URS Corporation Ltd vs BDW Trading Ltd marks a landmark moment for construction liability in the UK. It may increase the risk of future negligence, Defective Premises Act (DPA) and contribution claims \u2013 even long after buildings are completed<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":858219,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39705,25837],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-858218","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-liability","8":"category-shift"},"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/858218","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=858218"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/858218\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/858219"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=858218"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=858218"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=858218"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}