Harrison & Ors v Shepherd Homes Ltd & Ors

Harrison & Ors v Shepherd Homes Ltd & Ors

The court held that, as between the Claimants and the NHBC Parties, there should be no order as to costs for the foundation defect claims, except that the NHBC must pay the Claimants’ costs of the NHBC’s unsuccessful strike out/summary judgment application (excluding costs relating to abandoned claims), and the Claimants must pay NHBC’s costs for the abandoned claims. As between the Claimants and SHL, SHL must pay the Claimants’ costs of the proceedings against NHBC (excluding costs of the strike out application and abandoned claims), but not costs relating to NHBC-BCS. The stay of proceedings between Claimants and NHBC Parties continues.

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, Multi Party Litigation, Defective Premises, Contractual Liability, Bullock and Sanderson Orders
Civil Procedure Construction Law Insurance Law Costs Orders Multi Party Litigation Defective Premises Contractual Liability Bullock and Sanderson 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 3 Authorities cited 6 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?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, as between the Claimants and the NHBC Parties, there should be no order as to costs for the foundation defect claims, except that the NHBC must pay the Claimants’ costs of the NHBC’s unsuccessful strike out/summary judgment application (excluding costs relating to abandoned claims), and the Claimants must pay NHBC’s costs for the abandoned claims. As between the Claimants and SHL, SHL must pay the Claimants’ costs of the proceedings against NHBC (excluding costs of the strike out application and abandoned claims), but not costs relating to NHBC-BCS. The stay of proceedings between Claimants and NHBC Parties continues.

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.