Our goal is to help people in the best way possible. this is a basic principle in every case and cause for success. contact us today for a free consultation.
Practice Areas
Newsletter
Sign up to our newsletter
Australia-wide · No win, no fee · Free case evaluation — speak to us today
Claim Type — Engineers
When an engineer gets it wrong, the consequences are rarely minor. A foundation that settles unevenly. A drainage design that sends water into your property every time it rains. A structural report that gave a clean bill of health to a building that should never have been certified. These aren’t paperwork errors — they’re failures that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to fix, stall construction projects for months, or leave people unable to sell or occupy a property they’ve invested everything in.
Engineers are licensed professionals. They hold themselves out as having specialised knowledge, and clients engage them on precisely that basis. When that knowledge is applied carelessly — or not properly applied at all — the law provides a path to hold them accountable. Fair Go Australia connects Australians with specialist professional negligence lawyers who understand both the legal framework and the technical complexity of engineering claims.
Overview
A claim against an engineer is a legal action brought when a qualified engineer — structural, civil, geotechnical, mechanical, or electrical — fails to meet the standard of care their profession requires, and that failure causes a measurable loss.
Engineers owe a duty of care to the clients who engage them. In some circumstances, that duty extends to third parties who reasonably rely on an engineer’s advice, design, or certification. The foundational duty of care principles trace back to Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, and the High Court’s landmark decision in Perre v Apand Pty Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 180 remains the leading Australian authority on where liability for pure economic loss begins and ends.
Claims can be brought in contract — based on the terms of the engagement agreement — or in tort, under the law of negligence, or both. The route that best suits your situation depends on the nature of the failure and the losses involved.
Common failure types
Engineering negligence takes many forms. The common thread is this: a qualified professional was engaged to apply their expertise, they fell short of the standard a competent practitioner would have met, and someone suffered a real loss because of it.
Structural engineering failures
Incorrect load calculations, missed design flaws, inadequate assessment of soil conditions — these errors can result in serious structural damage or, in the most severe cases, collapse. If a building or structure has failed in a way that a competent structural engineer should have foreseen and prevented, there may be a strong basis for a claim.
Civil engineering errors
Road design, drainage systems, stormwater management, infrastructure — when civil engineering work is inadequate, the consequences can include flooding, erosion, property damage, and failed subdivisions. The costs of rectification are frequently significant, and the responsible party is not always obvious without expert analysis.
Geotechnical negligence
An inadequate site investigation, a misclassification of soil conditions, or a missed assessment of landslip risk can cause foundation failure, subsidence, or catastrophic movement of structures. Geotechnical errors are particularly costly because they are often discovered only after construction is complete.
Certification and inspection failures
Issuing a structural compliance certificate or inspection report that doesn’t reflect the true condition of a building is a serious professional failure. If you relied on an engineer’s certification and the building subsequently proved to be defective in exactly the areas assessed, you may have a claim.
Project cost and management errors
Negligent cost estimates and inadequate project oversight have derailed major construction projects across Australia. Where an engineer’s failures have contributed to significant budget blowouts, project abandonment, or delay damages, the financial consequences can be recovered through a negligence claim.
Mechanical and electrical engineering failures
A design or specification error in mechanical or electrical systems — equipment that fails, fire risks that weren’t identified, industrial systems that cause injury or business interruption — can give rise to claims that are both technically complex and financially substantial.
Expert witness negligence
Where an engineer provides an expert opinion in litigation and that opinion is negligently given, causing a party to lose a case they should have won, there may be a separate claim against the engineer. The High Court’s decision in Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588 sets out the standards to which expert evidence must conform.
Could this apply to you?
Most people who contact us aren’t sure. That’s normal — engineering claims involve technical subject matter, and the legal framework isn’t always obvious. A free evaluation is designed to give you a clear answer without any obligation.
There are four elements every professional negligence claim must establish. Here’s how they apply to claims against engineers:
1. Duty of care
Did the engineer owe you a professional duty? Where a formal engagement existed — a contract, a letter of instruction, a scope of works — a duty of care is almost always present. In some cases, a duty can also arise in favour of third parties who were foreseeably affected by the engineer’s work, even without a direct contract.
2. Breach of duty
Did the engineer’s conduct fall below the standard expected of a reasonably competent engineer in the same discipline? This isn’t about whether the outcome was bad — it’s about whether a competent professional in the same position would have done things differently. The objective standard of care established in Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 479 applies across professional disciplines, including engineering.
3. Causation
Did the engineer’s failure cause your loss? This is frequently the most contested element in engineering claims. Courts apply a nuanced approach to causation — including how to assess losses that involve uncertain hypothetical outcomes — guided by the High Court’s analysis in Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638.
4. Recoverable loss
Did you suffer actual, measurable harm? This might be repair costs, project losses, diminution in property value, or consequential financial losses. The loss must be real and quantifiable — not merely the distress of things not going to plan.
If you’re uncertain about any of these elements, that’s precisely why a free evaluation exists. Our team can review your situation and give you an honest assessment of where you stand.
The claim process
Engineering negligence claims are not straightforward matters. They require technical expert evidence, careful legal analysis, and a methodical approach to building the claim. Here’s what the process generally looks like:
Step 1 — Document the failure
Gather everything: contracts, engagement letters, engineering plans and reports, site inspection records, correspondence, photographs of defects or damage, and any quotes you’ve received for rectification work. The more complete your record, the stronger the foundation for your claim.
Step 2 — Obtain an independent expert opinion
A second qualified engineer needs to assess the original work and provide a written opinion on whether the standard of care was met. This expert evidence is critical — courts will not accept a negligence claim against an engineer without it. The standards for admissible expert evidence were clarified in Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588.
Step 3 — Engage a specialist lawyer
Engineering claims sit at the intersection of technical complexity and legal nuance. A specialist professional negligence lawyer — not a generalist — is essential. They will assess the merits, identify the correct defendants, and advise on the best claim pathway.
Step 4 — Letter of demand and pre-litigation negotiation
Most engineering negligence claims begin with a formal letter of demand to the engineer and their professional indemnity insurer. A significant proportion of claims resolve at this stage through negotiated settlement, without the need for court proceedings.
Step 5 — Litigation if required
Where settlement is not achievable, proceedings are filed in the appropriate court — typically the Supreme Court of the relevant state for substantial claims. The court determines the matter based on the evidence, including expert engineering evidence on both sides.
Your entitlements
Compensation in a successful engineering negligence claim is aimed at putting you back in the position you would have been in had the engineer done their job properly. In practice, recoverable losses typically include:
For a preliminary estimate of your potential claim value, see our economic loss claims guide.
Professional negligence claims against engineers must generally be commenced within 3 years of the date you became aware — or should reasonably have become aware — of the negligence. In some states and depending on how the claim is framed in contract, a general 6-year limitation period may also apply. Missing the deadline can permanently extinguish your right to recover, regardless of the strength of your underlying claim. If you are at all uncertain whether your limitation period is still open, contact our team for a free assessment as soon as possible.
Free case evaluation
Engineering negligence claims are among the more complex categories of professional negligence — they require specialist legal knowledge combined with genuine understanding of engineering standards and expert evidence requirements. Our team works with lawyers who handle exactly these claims, and the initial evaluation costs you nothing.
We respond to all enquiries within 1 business day.
Why Fair Go Australia
Specialist focus, not generalist coverage
Fair Go Australia works exclusively in professional negligence. Engineering claims are technically demanding — they require lawyers who understand both the legal standard-of-care framework and the engineering disciplines involved. A generalist firm handling employment disputes one week and personal injury the next is not the right fit for a claim like this.
Australia-wide reach
Engineering failures happen everywhere — metropolitan projects, regional subdivisions, remote infrastructure. Regardless of where your project was located, our network of specialist lawyers can assist. We operate entirely across Australia, with no geographic restrictions on who we can help.
No win, no fee
If your claim is unsuccessful, you pay nothing in legal fees. This arrangement means our lawyers take on genuine risk alongside you — which is a strong reason for them to assess your claim honestly before committing to it. You get a real evaluation of merits, not a guaranteed sign-up.
Free evaluation, no pressure
The initial case evaluation is genuinely free. You are not committing to anything by making contact. Our team reviews the substance of what happened and gives you a frank assessment of your options. If the claim isn’t strong enough to pursue, we will tell you that clearly — because that is the most useful thing we can do for you.
Common questions
Yes. Engineers are licensed professionals who owe a duty of care to clients and, in some circumstances, to third parties. Where an engineer’s conduct falls below the standard of a reasonably competent professional in their field and causes measurable loss, a negligence claim may be available. Claims can be brought in contract, tort, or both depending on the circumstances of the engagement.
The core requirement is independent expert evidence from another qualified engineer who can assess the original work and give a professional opinion that the standard of care was not met. You also need to establish that this breach caused your loss. A specialist lawyer will coordinate this process — it is not something you are expected to manage yourself.
Generally, 3 years from the date you became aware — or should reasonably have become aware — of the negligence. Depending on how the claim is framed and which state you are in, a longer 6-year period may apply to contract-based claims. Time limits are strictly enforced; missing a deadline can permanently bar your claim even if negligence is clear. Do not delay in getting advice.
Possibly. The law recognises that a duty of care can arise in favour of third parties who were foreseeably affected by an engineer’s work, even without a direct contractual relationship. The analysis depends on the specific facts — the nature of the engineer’s role, what they knew or should have known about who would rely on their work, and whether your reliance was reasonable. This is exactly the kind of question a specialist lawyer can answer after reviewing your circumstances.
Under a no-win, no-fee arrangement, there are no upfront legal costs. If the claim succeeds, fees are agreed in advance. If the claim is unsuccessful, you do not pay legal fees. In litigation, there may also be disbursements — such as expert witness fees — which are discussed transparently before proceedings are commenced.
A contract claim is based on the terms of the engagement agreement — the engineer failed to deliver what they were contracted to provide. A negligence claim is based on the broader duty of care owed under the law of tort, independent of any contract. The distinction matters for limitation periods, the damages recoverable, and how the claim is pleaded. In many engineering cases, both are run together, and a specialist lawyer will advise on the appropriate approach.
Related reading: Breach of duty explained · Architect negligence claims · Economic loss and compensation · All claim types
The information on this page is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Limitation periods and legislative provisions vary by state and territory. You should obtain independent legal advice about your specific circumstances before taking any action. Fair Go Australia is a legal claim assistance platform, not a law firm.
Our goal is to help people in the best way possible. this is a basic principle in every case and cause for success. contact us today for a free consultation.
Sign up to our newsletter