Laing O’Rourke gets green light to pursue hospital claim

Laing O’Rourke can continue with a claim for breach of contract against an adviser it employed on a defective PFI mental health hospital, a judge has ruled.

The contractor is suing consultant Sweett for £20.4m over independent testing work carried out by cost and management firm Nisbet, which Sweett acquired in 2008.

Laing O’Rourke claims Nisbet should have picked up design and build issues, including the lack of a fire safety assessment, at the Roseberry Park Hospital in Middlesbrough. Laing O’Rourke was appointed as main contractor in 2007.

And in a Technology and Construction Court ruling published yesterday, Mr Justice Freedman dismissed an attempt by Sweett to halt the case.

The judge said there was “no reason for a strike-out in the instant case, nor is there a reason to require the case to be repleaded with a view to saving the case from strike-out”.

After tests identified serious fire safety concerns, the trust issued a claim in 2020 for £125m against the project company covering various defects, which was passed down to Laing O’Rourke.

The following year, the parties reached a settlement agreement that involved Laing O’Rourke paying £18m.

The main contractor proceeded to take separate legal action against three of its subcontractors – Sweett, Medical Architecture and roofing firm Deeside Timberframe Ltd.

In the Sweett case, Laing O’Rourke claims that Nisbet’s review of the designs and inspection of works was negligent, which Sweett disputes.

In his judgement yesterday, the judge said that the case had an “unhappy history” that had so far resulted in legal costs of “several hundreds of thousands of pounds”.

He said that it was “difficult to escape the impression” that some of the submissions and discussions had been made “so as to set the scene for submissions which may be made as to costs irrespective of the result, particularly if the various versions have generated large costs”.