Matthew Peter George Biddick v Peter Biddick & Ors

Matthew Peter George Biddick v Peter Biddick & Ors

The defendants were the successful party in the application to enforce settlement terms, as the claimant's conduct delayed completion and introduced new demands post-settlement. The application was justified and not premature. The defendants are entitled to their costs, assessed summarily.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Matthew Peter George Biddick; Defendant/applicant: Peter Biddick; Defendant/applicant: Margaret Rose Biddick; Defendant/applicant: John Carson Biddick
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil (property/trusts/probate) / Post Settlement Application for Enforcement and Costs Determination
Outcome
Application granted; costs awarded to defendants/applicants.
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Partnership Disputes, Settlement Enforcement, Costs Orders, CPR Part 36 Offers
Property Law Trusts Law Civil Procedure Proprietary Estoppel Partnership Disputes Settlement Enforcement Costs Orders CPR Part 36 Offers

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Peter George Biddick

Claimant/respondent

Peter Biddick

Defendant/applicant

Margaret Rose Biddick

Defendant/applicant

John Carson Biddick

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property/trusts/probate) / Post Settlement Application for Enforcement and Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants were justified in applying to enforce settlement terms under CPR 36.14(8)
  2. 2 Whether the claimant failed to honour the settlement terms
  3. 3 Whether the application was premature

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants were the successful party in the application to enforce settlement terms, as the claimant's conduct delayed completion and introduced new demands post-settlement. The application was justified and not premature. The defendants are entitled to their costs, assessed summarily.

Court Disposition

Application granted; costs awarded to defendants/applicants.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay defendants' costs of the application on the standard basis, assessed summarily at £30,750 (including counsel’s fees) and other disbursements of £539, payable within 14 days.