Overview
Rees v Skerrett is an important case for understanding the risks that arise when demolition exposes or affects an adjoining property.
Although the case was not a modern Party Wall Act dispute, the principles remain highly relevant to party wall practice.
What happened
A terraced house was demolished without adequate shoring or weather protection. The adjoining property then suffered problems, including damp penetration and structural movement.
The decision
The adjoining owner succeeded on appeal in relation to movement caused by interference with support. The court treated that movement as capable of supporting a nuisance claim.
Damp penetration alone did not create a separate right to weather protection as an easement, but the court considered the broader duty to take reasonable precautions against foreseeable harm.
Why it matters
Where works expose a shared or flank wall, the building owner must take sensible steps to avoid foreseeable damage. That can include temporary support, weathering and proper sequencing.
A party wall award should deal clearly with these practical protections where the Act applies.