DWR Cymru Cyfyngedig (Welsh Water) v Corus UK Ltd [2006] EWHC 1183 (Ch) (26 May 2006)

DWR Cymru Cyfyngedig (Welsh Water) v Corus UK Ltd [2006] EWHC 1183 (Ch) (26 May 2006)

It is not an abuse of process for Corus to challenge the validity of the Director's approval of the charges schemes in defending DCWW's claim for payment; collateral challenge is permitted where the validity of a public law decision is a necessary element of the claimant's case.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1183 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/part 20 Defendant: DWR CYMRU CYFYNGEDIG (Welsh Water); Defendant/part 20 Claimant: CORUS UK LIMITED; Second Part 20 Defendant: THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF WATER SERVICES
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Summary Judgment / Summary Judgment Hearing
Outcome
Summary judgment refused
Legal Topics
Charges Scheme Validity, Abuse of Process, Procedural Exclusivity, Water Industry Regulation, Judicial Review, Collateral Challenge, Competition Act 1998
Public Law Contract Law Competition Law Administrative Law Charges Scheme Validity Abuse of Process Procedural Exclusivity Water Industry Regulation +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DWR CYMRU CYFYNGEDIG (Welsh Water)

Claimant/part 20 Defendant

CORUS UK LIMITED

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF WATER SERVICES

Second Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Summary Judgment / Summary Judgment Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Corus is liable to pay charges under the non-potable industrial tariff post-1 April 2004
  2. 2 Whether the charges schemes apply to the Corus sites
  3. 3 Whether the charges schemes are valid and lawfully made

Ratio Decidendi

It is not an abuse of process for Corus to challenge the validity of the Director's approval of the charges schemes in defending DCWW's claim for payment; collateral challenge is permitted where the validity of a public law decision is a necessary element of the claimant's case.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment refused