RG Securities (No.2) Ltd v (Allianz Global Corporate And Specialty CE & Ors

RG Securities (No.2) Ltd v (Allianz Global Corporate And Specialty CE & Ors

Maskell is not entitled to summary judgment because the Claimant has a realistic prospect of establishing deliberate concealment by Maskell, which would postpone the limitation period under s.32(1)(b) Limitation Act 1980. The evidence is incomplete and a fuller investigation at trial is warranted.

Parties
Claimant: RG Securities (No.2) Limited; First Defendant: Allianz Global Corporate and Specialty CE; Second Defendant: Building Lifeplans Limited; Third Defendant: R Maskell Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Construction/defective Premises / Summary Judgment Application by Third Defendant
Outcome
Summary judgment application by Maskell dismissed
Legal Topics
Defective Premises Act 1972, Limitation Act 1980, Building Regulations, Summary Judgment, Concealment and Limitation
Construction Law Limitation Law Property Law Defective Premises Act 1972 Limitation Act 1980 Building Regulations Summary Judgment Concealment and Limitation

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

Parties

RG Securities (No.2) Limited

Claimant

Allianz Global Corporate and Specialty CE

First Defendant

Building Lifeplans Limited

Second Defendant

R Maskell Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Construction/defective Premises / Summary Judgment Application by Third Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against Maskell is statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether deliberate concealment postpones the limitation period under s.32(1)(b) Limitation Act 1980
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted to Maskell

Ratio Decidendi

Maskell is not entitled to summary judgment because the Claimant has a realistic prospect of establishing deliberate concealment by Maskell, which would postpone the limitation period under s.32(1)(b) Limitation Act 1980. The evidence is incomplete and a fuller investigation at trial is warranted.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment application by Maskell dismissed

Orders

  • Application by Maskell for summary judgment against the Claimant is refused
  • No order made on the alternative application regarding counterclaim or joinder of Maskell Loughton