Harrison & Ors v Shepherd Homes Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 2786 (TCC) (06 August 2014)

Harrison & Ors v Shepherd Homes Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 2786 (TCC) (06 August 2014)

The court held that, although this was not a classic case for a Sanderson or Bullock Order, it was reasonable for the Claimants to have joined the NHBC Parties given the uncertainty over liability and SHL's own conduct. The costs incurred by the Claimants in pursuing the NHBC (excluding certain abandoned claims and the strike out/summary judgment application) should be paid by SHL. There should be no order as to costs between the Claimants and the NHBC Parties, except that NHBC pays the Claimants' costs of the failed strike out/summary judgment application, and Claimants pay NHBC's costs relating to the abandoned claims. The proceedings between Claimants and NHBC Parties remain stayed.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2786 (TCC)
Parties
Claimants: Andrew Harrison and Others; First Defendant: Shepherd Homes Limited; Second Defendant: National House-Building Council; Third Defendant: NHBC Building Control Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders made as specified; proceedings between Claimants and NHBC Parties stayed.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Defective Premises Act 1972, NHBC Buildmark Policy, Multi Party Litigation, Sanderson/bullock Orders
Construction Law Civil Procedure Costs Orders Defective Premises Act 1972 NHBC Buildmark Policy Multi Party Litigation Sanderson/bullock Orders

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Harrison and Others

Claimants

Shepherd Homes Limited

First Defendant

National House-Building Council

Second Defendant

NHBC Building Control Services Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who should bear the costs of proceedings against the NHBC Parties?
  2. 2 Whether SHL should pay the Claimants' costs of pursuing the NHBC Parties?
  3. 3 Whether the NHBC Parties should pay or recover costs given the outcome and procedural history?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although this was not a classic case for a Sanderson or Bullock Order, it was reasonable for the Claimants to have joined the NHBC Parties given the uncertainty over liability and SHL's own conduct. The costs incurred by the Claimants in pursuing the NHBC (excluding certain abandoned claims and the strike out/summary judgment application) should be paid by SHL. There should be no order as to costs between the Claimants and the NHBC Parties, except that NHBC pays the Claimants' costs of the failed strike out/summary judgment application, and Claimants pay NHBC's costs relating to the abandoned claims. The proceedings between Claimants and NHBC Parties remain stayed.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made as specified; proceedings between Claimants and NHBC Parties stayed.

Orders

  • No order as to costs between Claimants and NHBC Parties for foundation defect claims, except as below.
  • Claimants to pay NHBC's costs of claims in paragraphs 25 and 54 of Particulars of Claim.