The decision in Jones v Ruth and its impact on the construction industry

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to look at the recent UK Court of Appeal decision in Jones v Ruth and explores whether building works are capable of being construed as harassment by the Courts.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper looks at the concept of harassment as used in the Prevention of Harassment Act 1997 and how this applies in the context of building operations. It adopts a black letter or doctrinal approach to the study.

Findings

Whilst it is confirmed that a certain amount of inconvenience due to building operations is not actionable in English law, the Court of Appeal in this case has confirmed that in cases where harassment is proven, then substantial damages may be imposed on the offending party. This has implications not only for building contractors but for construction professionals such as architects or building surveyors who are involved in supervising contractors.

Research limitations/implications

This research takes the subject of construction law into uncharted territory. Previously it was thought by many observers that the Prevention of Harassment Act was confined to cases involving employment law and/or sexual or racial discrimination. Jones v Ruth shatters this previous thinking in this area and confirms that “harassment” cases can be applied in building projects. It is arguable that were Jones v Ruth merely a High Court decision, then only a limited weight might be given to the verdict. However, Jones v Ruth now is a Court of Appeal decision which gives an authoritative voice to the verdict by some of the most powerful judges in the land.

Practical implications

The practical implication is that building surveyors supervising building works need to be aware of the law to avoid being sued for harassment.

Social implications

It might have been taken for granted that all building works involve noise, dust, vibration, etc. Jones v Ruth confirms that in extreme circumstances it is possible to recover large damages for harassment and that all persons involved in the construction process ought to take note.

Originality/value

There is an expanding body of law dealing with compensation for inconvenience and disturbance, however there is a paucity of literature dealing with the implications of this for building surveyors and construction professionals. This paper explores claims for harassment through the lens of a major Court of Appeal decision in a succinct and practical way to allow academics and practitioners an insight into this expanding area of construction law.

Citation

Donohoe, S. (2013), "The decision in Jones v Ruth and its impact on the construction industry", Structural Survey, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 93-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/02630801311317518