RG Securities (No.2) Ltd v (Allianz Global Corporate And Specialty CE & Ors [2020] EWHC 1646 (TCC) (24 June 2020)

RG Securities (No.2) Ltd v (Allianz Global Corporate And Specialty CE & Ors [2020] EWHC 1646 (TCC) (24 June 2020)

The claim against Maskell is not suitable for 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) of the Limitation Act 1980. The evidence is incomplete and further investigation at trial is warranted.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1646 (TCC)
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 (technology and Construction Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Third Defendant
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Defective Premises Act 1972, Building Regulations, Summary Judgment, Concealment Under Limitation Act 1980
Construction Law Tort Law Contract Law Limitation of Actions Defective Premises Act 1972 Building Regulations Summary Judgment Concealment Under Limitation Act 1980

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 12 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 (technology and Construction Court) / 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 by Maskell postpones the limitation period under s.32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted to Maskell

Ratio Decidendi

The claim against Maskell is not suitable for 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) of the Limitation Act 1980. The evidence is incomplete and further investigation at trial is warranted.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed

Orders

  • Maskell's application for summary judgment is refused
  • No order made on the alternative application regarding the counterclaim; procedural requirements must be satisfied if pursued