Waterman Transport Ltd v Torchwood Properties Ltd [2015] EWHC 1446 (TCC) (17 April 2015)

Waterman Transport Ltd v Torchwood Properties Ltd [2015] EWHC 1446 (TCC) (17 April 2015)

The counterclaim was struck out because the defendant failed to provide expert evidence necessary for a professional negligence claim and the pleading lacked sufficient particularity. Summary judgment was granted on the first three invoices as there was no arguable defence. The remainder of the claim was allowed due to the defendant's substantive non-compliance with the unless order, justifying judgment for the claimant.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1446 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Waterman Transport Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Torchwood Properties Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology & Construction Court) / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications Before Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant; counterclaim struck out; summary judgment granted on part of the claim; costs awarded to claimant; permission for defendant to apply for relief from sanctions subject to payment on account of costs.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Professional Negligence, Costs, Relief From Sanctions
Contract Law Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Strike Out Costs Relief From Sanctions

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waterman Transport Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Torchwood Properties Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology & Construction Court) / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's counterclaim for professional negligence should be struck out for lack of expert evidence and insufficient pleading
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to summary judgment on certain unpaid invoices
  3. 3 Whether the defence and counterclaim should be struck out for non-compliance with a court order (unless order)

Ratio Decidendi

The counterclaim was struck out because the defendant failed to provide expert evidence necessary for a professional negligence claim and the pleading lacked sufficient particularity. Summary judgment was granted on the first three invoices as there was no arguable defence. The remainder of the claim was allowed due to the defendant's substantive non-compliance with the unless order, justifying judgment for the claimant.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant; counterclaim struck out; summary judgment granted on part of the claim; costs awarded to claimant; permission for defendant to apply for relief from sanctions subject to payment on account of costs.

Orders

  • Counterclaim struck out for lack of expert evidence and insufficient pleading
  • Summary judgment for claimant on invoices 3035731, 3056177, and 3060510