Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd & Ors

Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd & Ors

The assignment of the Sub-Contract by MW to EWHL was effective to transfer all accrued and future rights, but not the burden, and did not amount to novation. MW cannot pursue direct claims against Outotec under the Sub-Contract. For contribution claims under the 1978 Act, MW and Outotec are liable for 'the same damage' in respect of delay and defects, but not for termination losses.

Parties
Claimant: Energy Works (Hull) Limited; First Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: MW High Tech Projects UK Limited; Second Defendant: M&W Group GmbH; Part 20 Defendant: Outotec (USA) Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Construction Dispute / Ruling on Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined; MW's assignment transferred all rights, not burden; no novation; partial contribution claims allowed.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Contractual Rights, Novation, Contribution Claims, Liquidated Damages, Termination for Default, Collateral Warranties
Contract Law Construction Law Commercial Law Assignment of Contractual Rights Novation Contribution Claims Liquidated Damages Termination for Default +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Energy Works (Hull) Limited

Claimant

MW High Tech Projects UK Limited

First Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

M&W Group GmbH

Second Defendant

Outotec (USA) Inc

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Construction Dispute / Ruling on Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Effect of assignment of Sub-Contract by MW to EWHL
  2. 2 Whether assignment transferred accrued rights or only future rights
  3. 3 Whether assignment amounted to novation

Ratio Decidendi

The assignment of the Sub-Contract by MW to EWHL was effective to transfer all accrued and future rights, but not the burden, and did not amount to novation. MW cannot pursue direct claims against Outotec under the Sub-Contract. For contribution claims under the 1978 Act, MW and Outotec are liable for 'the same damage' in respect of delay and defects, but not for termination losses.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined; MW's assignment transferred all rights, not burden; no novation; partial contribution claims allowed.

Orders

  • Hearing adjourned for consequential matters and applications for permission to appeal.
  • Time limits extended until further order.