Corus UK Ltd v Terex-Demag Ltd

Corus UK Ltd v Terex-Demag Ltd

The judge exercised his discretion to make no order as to costs because Terex failed to promptly identify the arbitration clause and delayed the application for a stay, thereby incurring unnecessary costs. The normal rule on costs following a successful section 9 application did not apply due to Terex's conduct and failure to follow the pre-action protocol.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: Corus UK Limited; Applicant/defendant: Terex-Demag Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (costs Order)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Stay of Proceedings, Pre Action Protocols, Arbitration Clause, Exercise of Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Arbitration Construction Law Costs Orders Stay of Proceedings Pre Action Protocols Arbitration Clause Exercise of Judicial Discretion

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

Parties

Corus UK Limited

Respondent/claimant

Terex-Demag Limited

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (costs Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in exercising discretion on costs following a stay under section 9 of the Arbitration Act
  2. 2 Whether the pre-action protocol was properly followed and its impact on costs
  3. 3 Whether the timing and conduct of the application for a stay affected entitlement to costs

Ratio Decidendi

The judge exercised his discretion to make no order as to costs because Terex failed to promptly identify the arbitration clause and delayed the application for a stay, thereby incurring unnecessary costs. The normal rule on costs following a successful section 9 application did not apply due to Terex's conduct and failure to follow the pre-action protocol.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • No order as to costs of the action or the application for a stay
  • Terex may seek costs in the arbitration if successful