Grizzly Business Ltd v Stena Drilling Ltd & Anor

Grizzly Business Ltd v Stena Drilling Ltd & Anor

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that an oral agreement for a success fee was concluded between Grizzly Business Limited and Stena Drillmax 1 Limited, and that the absence of contemporaneous written confirmation did not negate the agreement. The costs order against Stena Drilling Limited was justified as it had funded and controlled the defence, and the reduction for success on the contracting party point was proportionate.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Grizzly Business Limited; Defendant/appellant: Stena Drilling Limited; Defendant/appellant: Stena Drillmax 1 Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment and Order
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Success Fee Agreements, Consultancy Contracts, Costs Orders, Appellate Review of Factual Findings
Contract Law Civil Procedure Success Fee Agreements Consultancy Contracts Costs Orders Appellate Review of Factual Findings

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grizzly Business Limited

Claimant/respondent

Stena Drilling Limited

Defendant/appellant

Stena Drillmax 1 Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment and Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral agreement for a success fee was concluded between Grizzly Business Limited and Stena Drillmax 1 Limited
  2. 2 Whether the absence of contemporaneous written confirmation negated the existence of the agreement
  3. 3 Whether the costs order against Stena Drilling Limited was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that an oral agreement for a success fee was concluded between Grizzly Business Limited and Stena Drillmax 1 Limited, and that the absence of contemporaneous written confirmation did not negate the agreement. The costs order against Stena Drilling Limited was justified as it had funded and controlled the defence, and the reduction for success on the contracting party point was proportionate.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • The Appellants’ appeals be dismissed.
  • The stay contained in paragraph 2 of the Order of Lord Justice Christopher Clarke dated 6 July 2015 shall be lifted.