W.H. Newson Holding Ltd & Ors v IMI Plc & Anor

W.H. Newson Holding Ltd & Ors v IMI Plc & Anor

Section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 precludes Delta from arguing that Travis Perkins’ claim was time barred, as the facts pleaded in the Reply formed part of the factual basis of the claim and the burden of proof for limitation would have fallen on Travis Perkins. Delta’s limitation defence is not a collateral defence excluded from the statutory assumption.

Parties
Claimant: W. H. Newson Holding Limited and Others; First Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: IMI PLC; Second Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: IMI Kynoch Limited; Part 20 Defendant: Delta Limited (formerly Delta PLC); Part 20 Defendant: Delta Engineering Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Determination of Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Preliminary issue determined in favour of IMI; Delta precluded from raising limitation defence.
Legal Topics
Contribution Proceedings, Limitation Period, Cartel Damages, Section 1(4) Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978, Section 32 Limitation Act 1980
Competition Law Civil Procedure Limitation Contribution Proceedings Limitation Period Cartel Damages Section 1(4) Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978 Section 32 Limitation Act 1980

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W. H. Newson Holding Limited and Others

Claimant

IMI PLC

First Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

IMI Kynoch Limited

Second Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

Delta Limited (formerly Delta PLC)

Part 20 Defendant

Delta Engineering Holdings Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Determination of Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 precludes Delta from relying on any part of its defence to IMI's Part 20 claim, specifically whether Delta can argue that the Claimants' claim was time barred

Ratio Decidendi

Section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 precludes Delta from arguing that Travis Perkins’ claim was time barred, as the facts pleaded in the Reply formed part of the factual basis of the claim and the burden of proof for limitation would have fallen on Travis Perkins. Delta’s limitation defence is not a collateral defence excluded from the statutory assumption.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issue determined in favour of IMI; Delta precluded from raising limitation defence.

Orders

  • Section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 precludes Delta from arguing that Travis Perkins’ claim was time barred for the reasons set out in paragraph 18 of Delta's Amended Defence dated 16 October 2014.