ABSTRACT
Chapter 8 discusses the three judgements in the English case of MT Højgaard a/s v E.ON Climate and Renewables UK Robin Rigg East Ltd. The judgements contained detailed analyses of the conflicting requirements of preparing a design with due skill and care, and meeting a fitness for purpose obligation. The Supreme Court upheld the original judgement in the Technology and Construction Court that the contract required the wind turbine structures to have a service life of 20 years, notwithstanding that they were designed with due skill and care and in accordance with the relevant (but erroneous) international standard. The ultimate outcome depended on construction of the contractual terms in accordance with well-established principles; the fact that the judgement of the Court of Appeal differed from that of the Supreme Court emphasises the complexity of this task in the face of contractual documents of multiple authorship and loose wording.
