The construction industry employs many professionals dealing with complex project issues, it therefore necessarily follows that it is relatively common for a party to advance a claim on the basis of their professional having been negligent. Usually, because the aggrieved party believes their appointed professional ought to have done more to prevent the issue that had arisen.

There is a standard of care expected from the professional in the first place, in order to measure if the professional fell short of this standard or not. The standard of care expected of a professional is reasonable skill and care, which is derived from the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, (unless there are contractual terms to the contrary).

A tort case, Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee laid the groundwork for defining reasonable skill and care, in which it can be said that “It is sufficient if he exercises the ordinary skill of an ordinary competent man exercising that particular art.”

The level of reasonable skill and care is therefore defined as the standard of the “ordinary skill of an ordinary competent man” relevant to his profession.

In order to be considered negligent, the professional must have fallen short of his obligation to act with reasonable skill and care, being the skill level of an ordinary competent man. In other words, the average level of skill competence of a profession, not the best.

In order to be successful in a professional negligence claim, it is necessary to engage an expert in the same profession who agrees that the standard of care fell below the standard of the ordinary competent man. Failing to do so is likely to be fatal to a claim of negligence. A good example of one such judgment is Pantelli Associates Ltd v Corporate City Developments Number Two Ltd in which the Honourable Mr Justice Coulson stated:

"where an allegation of professional negligence is to be pleaded, that allegation must be supported (in writing) by a relevant professional with the necessary expertise. That is a matter of common sense: how can it be asserted that act x was something that an ordinary professional would and should not have done, if no professional in the same field had expressed such a view?”

The Pantelli case shows that it is essential to provide an expert report stating the professional had not exercised reasonable skill and care in order to be successful in a professional negligence claim.

Want to know more?

If you require an expert report in the field of quantity surveying or have a construction dispute which you require assistance with, please contact the author at david@quantumexperts.co.uk