Case No. HT-11-503
Technology and Construction Court

Case No. HT-11-503

Fecha: 31-Jul-2012

Invoices 3, 95, 100, 120, 122, 138, 172, 205, 219, 236, 237 and 259

173.All of these items related to the doors. I have already found on the facts that the doors were removed following the first inundation and there was no proper evidence that they were re-hung before the second inundation. They were therefore not the responsibility of the defendants because their removal (and any subsequent damage) was not their responsibility. 174.Secondly, these items were agreed to be excluded by the experts because they were items which could and should have been reused anyway. Mr Thomas confirmed that in his cross-examination. They are not therefore recoverable as part of the damages claim in any event. iii)