Photo of the CLT roof at Vitsœ's Leamington Spa headquarters Source:&nbsp Dirk Lindner Waugh Thistleton has won a High Court case brought by a former client which sued the practice over a rotted timber roof Furniture manufacturer Vitsœ had sought £4 million in damages from Waugh Thistleton, the delivery architect for its 3,677m² factory-and-office complex in Leamington Spa, which completed in 2017. Vitsœ blamed the practice for rotted cross-laminated timber (CLT) roof panels which needed replacing.  But following a court case held over several days in January, deputy high court judge Martin Bowdery dismissed the claims, ruling that Waugh Thistleton was ‘not liable to the claimant as alleged, or at all’. The High Court heard that the rotten roof panels had become too wet during construction. Although a roof covering had been due to be installed just two weeks after completion of the timber structure, delays meant the panels were exposed for several months over the winter of 2016/17. When the roof covering was eventually installed, a vapour control layer locked in the moisture. Advertisement Vitsoe had alleged that Waugh Thistleton breached its contract by failing to provide a moisture content control plan (MCCP); failing to recommend a temporary protective roof; and failing to act when construction did not take place according to the planned timetable.  However, Bowdery found ‘there was no obligation upon [Waugh Thistleton] to undertake a MCCP or risk assessment’, adding that the architect provided ‘a suitable and robust specification’ which would have prevented problems with excess water if complied with.  He also found that ‘close sequencing [of construction works was] a suitable and appropriate method of moisture protection’ and that ‘there was nothing about this project that meant a temporary roof was required’.  He added: ‘The programming of the construction of the roof was not the defendant’s responsibility. The protection of the roof works was not the defendant’s responsibility. The supervision and management of the trade contractors was not the defendant’s responsibility.’  Bowdery also said Waugh Thistleton was not responsible for monitoring the moisture content of the CLT panels. He said it was reasonable for the architect to expect timber frame contractor Hess to do this, adding that it was ultimately the responsibility of construction manager JCA to check it was being done. Advertisement The judge also found that the architect had not failed to ‘take appropriate steps in response to the CLT being exposed to sustained rainfall around Christmas 2016’. Bowdery said: ‘The defendant’s advice before and after the Christmas 2016 break was sensible, prudent and appropriate.’  The furniture manufacturer had been seeking to recoup more than £4 million it had spent on mending its roof, including construction and consultants’ costs, as well as interest paid on two multi-million-pound loans taken out to fund the remedial work. Waugh Thistleton had always denied breaching its contract, saying that ‘the matters of which the claimant complains were the responsibility of others’. Vitsoe has been contacted for comment. Waugh Thistleton declined to comment.  2025-04-11 Will Ing comment and share