Ardmore to appeal landmark £15m Building Safety Act ruling

The ruling in Crest Nicholson v Ardmore marks a serious escalation in how the Constructing Security Act 2022 can be utilized to pursue liabilities throughout company buildings, with the court docket making clear that group corporations will be compelled to face behind historic defects.

With Ardmore making ready an enchantment, the case is now set to grow to be a defining take a look at of how far the Constructing Security Act can attain into contractor group buildings and who in the end pays for legacy defects.

The dispute centres on Portsmouth’s Admiralty Quarter growth, a 21-storey residential tower and different a number of residential buildings delivered between 2007 and 2009.

Crest alleges widespread hearth security failures together with flamable insulation, lacking cavity obstacles and faulty hearth stopping.

An adjudicator dominated in August 2025 that Ardmore Development had breached its duties below the Faulty Premises Act and ordered it to pay £14.9m. The contractor entered administration the day earlier than the choice was issued and has not paid.

Crest then turned to the Constructing Security Act to pursue related corporations throughout the Ardmore group, arguing the broader enterprise ought to stand behind the liabilities.

Within the ensuing court docket case, Justice Constable granted Crest Nicholson two highly effective orders — an “anticipatory” Constructing Legal responsibility Order (BLO) overlaying any future legal responsibility at trial and a second BLO imposing a £14.9m adjudication award linked to fireside security defects on the Portsmouth scheme.

Crucially, the decide confirmed that adjudication selections can quantity to a “related legal responsibility” below the Act, opening the door for builders to pursue fee throughout group corporations with out ready for a full trial.

Ardmore confirmed it’ll problem the choice.

A spokesperson for the contractor mentioned: “We’re disenchanted by the Courtroom’s choice in relation to Admiralty Quarter, a venture delivered virtually 20 years in the past.

“We don’t take into account that the laws was meant to use on this manner, and we intend to enchantment the judgment.

“This isn’t an remoted situation. It has profound implications for the broader development sector, and we all know {that a} important variety of different contractors are dealing with related claims and can possible be intently monitoring how this case develops.

“As proceedings are ongoing, it might not be applicable to remark additional at this stage.”

The court docket discovered it was “simply and equitable” to increase legal responsibility throughout the Ardmore group, pointing to the insolvency of Ardmore Development Restricted, the group’s restructuring to isolate liabilities, frequent possession and management, and proof of great hearth security defects.

Makes an attempt to argue the transfer was untimely failed, with the decide ruling the court docket might act forward of trial the place legal responsibility was extremely possible.

He additionally rejected claims that adjudication awards have been too non permanent to help a BLO, confirming they create a binding legal responsibility until overturned.

The judgment sends a sign that insolvency and company restructuring is not going to defend contractor teams from historic constructing security claims, with legal responsibility now able to monitoring throughout related corporations below BLO powers.

Mark Lennon, development accomplice at Gateley Authorized, which acted for Crest Nicolson, mentioned: “This landmark choice has far-reaching implications for the development business.

“It considerably strengthens the power of builders and constructing homeowners to get well remediation prices and reinforces the precept that these liable for constructing security dangers will in the end be held to account throughout group buildings.

“Contractors, builders, funders and insurers might want to take a a lot nearer take a look at group huge publicity to BLOs at an early stage, notably the place adjudication, insolvency or restructuring is in play.

“The judgment sends a transparent message that the courts will use the complete breadth of the Constructing Security Act to make sure that legal responsibility for severe defects rests the place it correctly belongs.”