URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd

[2025] UKSC 21 — Supreme Court, 21 May 2025

Judgment: [2025] UKSC 21 (National Archives) · Supreme Court case page

Back to Index.

Issue

Not cladding per se, but the leading post-Grenfell authority on consultant liability. URS was structural design consultant for two BDW residential tower-block developments (completed 2005 and 2012, East London and Leicester). Post-Grenfell investigations (2019–2021) found structural design defects; BDW no longer owned the buildings but voluntarily carried out remedial works and sued URS in tort and under the Defective Premises Act 1972.

Outcome

URS’s appeal dismissed on all four grounds:

  1. BDW could recover the cost of remedial works even though voluntarily incurred and undertaken after BDW had sold its interest in the developments.
  2. BDW could rely on the DPA 1972, whose limitation period was retrospectively extended to 30 years by s.135 Building Safety Act 2022.
  3. No inconsistency in BDW simultaneously owing duties to homeowners and being owed duties by URS.
  4. BDW was entitled to claim contribution from URS under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 even absent a judgment or settlement with a third party — a “payment in kind” (performing remedial works) was sufficient.

Notes

  • First Supreme Court consideration of the Building Safety Act 2022 and, at the apex appellate level, of the Defective Premises Act 1972.
  • Confirms s.1 DPA imposes a duty on developers and consultant engineers to build dwellings properly.
  • Lord Leggatt’s judgment on the contribution claim (Ground 4) is described as changing the understanding of contribution claims generally.
  • Signals significantly greater legal exposure for consultants on historic defects, including where liability might extend to parties not directly involved in the original project via corporate association.