Alvarez & Marsal senior director Mohammad Yadollahi’s expert testimony recently assisted the court in determining a £3.3 million pounds in damages for a historic building where King Henry VIII once stayed.

King Henry VIII once surveyed his fleet departing for the historic Field of Cloth of Gold summit from the garret window of this medieval building in Kent. Some five hundred years later, the riverside site is setting a precedent for legal damages awarded when remedial works don’t go far enough.

Alvarez & Marsal recently gave expert evidence on behalf of Roger and Suzanne Brookhouse, the couple who sued the Environment Agency (EA) for the severe water damage their works caused to the historic King’s Lodging in Sandwich – and won £3.3 million in damages. The successful outcome for the claimants in March 2026, and the substantial size of damages awarded, makes it a leading case on the flood liability of the EA under the Water Resources Act 1991.

The Brookhouses, who have owned the Grade-II listed, timber-framed building since 1991, pursued legal action after flood defence works carried out by the EA since 2014 left their walls damaged and their garden inundated with salt water, with subsequent remedial measures by the EA falling short of fixing the issues.

A&M senior director Mohammad Yadollahi testified as the technical expert on one of the most critical aspects of the claim, a retaining wall built by the EA as part of the Sandwich Town Tidal Defence System, which led to a rise in groundwater levels. While the EA undertook remedial works between 2015 and 2017, A&M’s assessment showed that these only addressed the symptoms of damage rather than the root cause. The judge accepted Mr. Yadollahi’s evidence and ruled in favour of the Brookhouses.¹

Fit for a King (and Queen)

As the outcome of this case demonstrates, the value of a historical building extends far beyond the financial value of the property itself. In the case of the King’s Lodging, it was as much about the appropriate measures to preserve centuries of English heritage, irrespective of whether the costs exceeded the property value.

Henry VIII is recorded as staying at the house in 1520², surveying his fleets before embarking for the Field of Cloth of Gold summit to cement his ties with Francois I of France near Calais, which set the scene for 18 days of revelry and tournaments at which the two sides could display their skills and wealth.³ Five decades later, his daughter and the last Tudor monarch, Elizabeth I, is said to have stayed at the lodging during her royal progress in Kent. Elizabeth watched militia from Sandwich cross the River Stour in boats and assault a wooden fort on the other bank, author and historian Paul Kendall writes in his book Queen Elizabeth I – The Life & Legacy of the Virgin Queen⁴ noting that a banquet comprising 161 dishes was held in the queen’s honour in the village school house.

“Even today, the building appears as it must have been back in the day, surrounded by a beautiful traditional English garden with a view to the river,” says Mr. Yadollahi. The building, which has witnessed such rich history, was deemed to be in a satisfactory condition in 2013, before the flood works carried out by the EA.

In 2014, the EA built a flood defence wall along the river frontage of the King’s Lodging, stopping at the wall of a historic dock belonging to the property. As a result, groundwater levels rose significantly, resulting in damp and damage to the house walls, garden and outdoor swimming pool. After a few rounds of unsuccessful repair work, the EA left the site around 2017, prompting the Brookhouses to pursue legal action to recover the cost of protecting and repairing the historic building.

‘A Model of Clarity’

Almost a decade of legal action at the Upper Tribunal concluded in March 2026, when Judge Elizabeth Cooke ruled in favour of the claimants after hearing from several experts comprising structural engineers, water and drainage experts, including A&M’s Mohammad Yadollahi, architects, horticulturists, quantity surveyors, and valuation experts.

Mr. Yadollahi's report, which the judge called a “model of clarity,” gave a clear explanation as to why past remedies had not addressed the underlying issue, and proposed a more permanent solution. A&M assessed the remedial works done in 2015, 2016 and 2017, as well as the previous experts’ conclusions, going through the correspondence between the claimants’ hydrology expert and the engineers hired by the EA. As part of evaluating the damages, we also carried out joint investigations with the EA’s technical expert at the property.

This comprehensive assessment provided a solid foundation to demonstrate that the works had only addressed the symptoms of damage rather than the root cause – excessive flow of water into the property from the dock corner. 

The judge concluded that the solution proposed by the EA’s expert would “probably be ineffective,” adding that “Mr Yadollahi’s solution, by contrast, is a targeted solution, addressing the problem that has been identified, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever of any other problems.”

How A&M can help

A&M’s Disputes and Investigation team provides services across all phases of the construction lifecycle. Our team of industry and technical experts have project management experience in the global construction industry, and specialise in providing expert services related to investigations and litigation support.

Our services include litigation, arbitration, and independent expert testimony, delivered across three core areas:

• Forensic technical services: Our technical experts apply specialist scientific and engineering methods to investigate engineering disputes, analyse evidence, and identify the root causes of alleged or observed defects.
• Delay analysis services: A&M’s delay experts identify why project timelines have slipped, determine the causes of delay, and assess entitlement to Extensions of Time (EoT).
• Quantum and cost assessment services: Our quantum experts provide independent, evidence-based valuations of construction claims, assessing damages arising from defects, delays, disruption, and cost overruns.

Sources:

[1] Roger Brookhouse & Anor v The Environment Agency.

[2] The Old Kings House, Historic England.

[3] The Field of Cloth of Gold, Historic Royal Palaces.

[4] Kendall, Paul, Queen Elizabeth I: Life & Legacy of the Virgin Queen, Pen & Swords.