Contractor loses High Court battle over combustible cladding on Gosport tower blocks

An affordable housing provider suing contractor Mulalley over combustible cladding on five tower blocks in Portsmouth has won its case in the High Court. Martlet Homes, an arm of affordable housing provider Hyde Group, has been suing contractor Mulalley, claiming £8m for the cost of replacing all the cladding at Gosport Towers, Portsmouth, and to provide a waking watch to protect residents’ safety. In a ruling handed down yesterday, judge Stephen Davies backed their arguments and ruled that Mulalley must pay for the replacement of the cladding and the waking watch. He said he needed reports from quantity surveyors to assess exactly how much should be paid. In his ruling, the judge said the case was notable because it raises the question of whether the specification of combustible EWI rendered cladding breached fire safety standards as they existed in the early to mid-2000s, well before the Grenfell Tower fire. Even so, he said, each case would depend on the specific contracts and fire safety standards. The Gosport Towers were built as social housing in the early 1960s. Two of them are more than 50m high and the other three are about 30m high. Buildings over 18m attract special fire regulations. According to the ruling, the social housing company that owned the towers decided to renovate them in the early 2000s, and chose to clad them in EWI render to improve their resistance to cold and damp penetration. Mulalley did the work, completing it between 2006 and 2008. Following the Grenfell Tower in June 2017, the new owner of the towers, Martlet Homes, investigated the cladding and alleged it found “serious installation defects, most significantly defects in the installation of the fire barriers which created a real risk that they would not operate as intended to prevent the spread of fire.” They immediately implemented a waking watch and launched proceedings against Mulalley In its claim, Hyde said the cladding was unsafe and did not comply with building regulations. Mulalley denies this, saying the buildings were deemed safe when constructed between 2005 and 2008. It argues that the fact government advice on cladding changed after the Grenfell fire in 2017 does not affect this. The case went to trial in March and the judge handed down his ruling yesterday. In the 90-page ruling the judge said Mulalley was “in breach of contract in fixing combustible cladding in 2005- 08.” He ruled that Martlet was entitled to recover the cost of replacement works. Mulalley & Co Ltd v Martlet Homes Ltd Court of Appeal (His Honour Judge Stephen Davies sitting as a High Court Judge) 14 July 2022