Richard England, contractor to pay €134,000 in damages for ‘poor construction’

Civil Court orders architects England and Borg Costanzi, firm England & England and contractors Gatt Bros to pay out a total of €133,714 in damages over ‘poorly constructed’ tourist village in Mellieha.

'An architect and a contractor remain responsible for 15 years from construction' - The Courts
'An architect and a contractor remain responsible for 15 years from construction' - The Courts

Mr Justice Silvio Meli, presiding over the First Hall of the Civil Court has ordered renowned architects Richard England and Albert Borg Costanzi, and their firm England & England to pay out €93,600 in damages to brothers Brian and Maurice Mizzi, owners of Hubbalit Developments Ltd, for damages sustained in a "poorly constructed" tourist apartment block in Mellieha Bay.

Building contractors Gatt Brothers, were also ordered to pay the Mizzi's damages, quantifed at €40,114.

All liable parties were also ordered to pay interest on the sums decreed against them, which date back to the case which was filed in 1992.

In handing judgement, Mr. Justice Meli heard that the architects and the contractor were engaged to design and construct "Festaval Apartments" in the Red Tower Tourist Village at Mellieha Bay. 

 According to Hubbalit, the block had been poorly constructed and defects in its construction were immediately apparent.

The architects, their firm and Gatt Bros Ltd denied any responsibility towards the Mizzi's.  

But the Court pointed out that its appointed architects who inspected the construction had in fact concluded that parts of the buildingn were in fact "defective and that there was a risk of a small part of the building collapsing," even though remedial action could be taken to avert the incumbent danger. 

The experts concluded that the defects were the result of "inadequate structural design" of the foundations, which were deemed "not adequate in an area where the underlying ground was rich in clay." 

The Court stood by the expert's opinions and their findings, stating that the supervision of the construction had not been "constant or adequate" and that the quality of the materials used when constructing had not been ensured.

Mr. Justice Meli dismissed the defendant's submissions that the case was time barred, adding that "an architect and a contractor were responsible for the building for a period of 15 years from construction, and that the defects in the structures had appeared in the early stages."