CR Construction (UK) Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC (Re Consequential Matters - Costs and Stay) [2026] EWHC 228 (TCC) (04 February 2026)

CR Construction (UK) Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC (Re Consequential Matters - Costs and Stay) [2026] EWHC 228 (TCC) (04 February 2026)

The employer intervener is entitled to its reasonable costs of involvement, but those costs are limited to the reasonable costs of reading in, responding, and attending the hearing, not as a full second defendant. The bank and employer are awarded costs on the standard basis, not indemnity, as the claimant's conduct was not unreasonable or out of the norm. No stay of the order is granted pending appeal, as no substantive injunction was ordered and no prejudice arises.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 228 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant / Applicant: CR Construction (UK) Limited; Defendant / Respondent: Barclays Bank PLC; Intervener: Northern Gateway (FEC) No. 7 Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application (consequential Matters: Costs and Stay) / Post Judgment (costs and Stay Determination)
Outcome
Costs awarded to the bank and employer intervener on the standard basis; no stay of order pending appeal.
Legal Topics
Costs of Interveners, Summary Assessment of Costs, Interim Injunctions, Performance Bonds, Stay of Orders Pending Appeal
Civil Procedure Construction Law Banking and Finance Costs of Interveners Summary Assessment of Costs Interim Injunctions Performance Bonds Stay of Orders Pending Appeal

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

Parties

CR Construction (UK) Limited

Claimant / Applicant

Barclays Bank PLC

Defendant / Respondent

Northern Gateway (FEC) No. 7 Limited

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Injunction Application (consequential Matters: Costs and Stay) / Post Judgment (costs and Stay Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the intervener (employer) is entitled to its costs of the injunction application
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded on the standard or indemnity basis
  3. 3 Whether a stay of the order should be granted pending appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The employer intervener is entitled to its reasonable costs of involvement, but those costs are limited to the reasonable costs of reading in, responding, and attending the hearing, not as a full second defendant. The bank and employer are awarded costs on the standard basis, not indemnity, as the claimant's conduct was not unreasonable or out of the norm. No stay of the order is granted pending appeal, as no substantive injunction was ordered and no prejudice arises.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the bank and employer intervener on the standard basis; no stay of order pending appeal.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay the bank's costs summarily assessed at £75,000 plus VAT.
  • Claimant to pay the employer intervener's costs summarily assessed at £75,000 (no VAT).