Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Ltd v Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 166 (TCC) (27 January 2023)

Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Ltd v Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 166 (TCC) (27 January 2023)

The claimant's conduct in putting the action on hold to align with the Aviva proceedings was commercially sensible and not abusive, especially as the First Defendant had indicated such alignment was appropriate. No abuse of process occurred; strike-out is not warranted.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 166 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Limited; First Defendant: Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Limited; Second Defendant: Sabre Structures Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application (abuse of Process) / Post Application Hearing, Pre Case Management Conference
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Warehousing Claims, Strike Out Applications, Limitation Periods, Case Management, Professional Duty to Warn
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Construction Law Abuse of Process Warehousing Claims Strike Out Applications Limitation Periods Case Management +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Limited

Claimant

Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Limited

First Defendant

Sabre Structures Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application (abuse of Process) / Post Application Hearing, Pre Case Management Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant deliberately warehoused the claim (put it on hold)
  2. 2 Whether such conduct amounted to abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether strike-out is a proportionate sanction

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's conduct in putting the action on hold to align with the Aviva proceedings was commercially sensible and not abusive, especially as the First Defendant had indicated such alignment was appropriate. No abuse of process occurred; strike-out is not warranted.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Summary assessment of costs: £95,000 payable by First Defendant to Claimant