Crown House Technologies Ltd v Cardiff Commissioning Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 54 (TCC) (18 January 2018)

Crown House Technologies Ltd v Cardiff Commissioning Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 54 (TCC) (18 January 2018)

The claimant's allegations against the second defendant were either unsupported by evidence, contradicted by pleadings, or dependent on speculative cross-examination. The User Manual was clear, and there was no evidence that marking of valves or post-leak conduct by ENP caused loss. The claim had no real prospect of success and summary judgment was granted to the second defendant.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 54 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Crown House Technologies Limited; First Defendant: Cardiff Commissioning Limited; Second Defendant: Emerson Network Power Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Second Defendant
Outcome
Summary judgment granted to the second defendant; claim against ENP dismissed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Breach of Contract, Product Liability, Delay in Proceedings, Relief From Sanctions
Contract Law Construction Law Summary Judgment Breach of Contract Product Liability Delay in Proceedings 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown House Technologies Limited

Claimant

Cardiff Commissioning Limited

First Defendant

Emerson Network Power Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Second Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's case against the second defendant has a real prospect of success under CPR Part 24
  2. 2 Whether the User Manual supplied by the second defendant was deficient or unclear
  3. 3 Whether failure to mark discharge valves constituted a breach

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's allegations against the second defendant were either unsupported by evidence, contradicted by pleadings, or dependent on speculative cross-examination. The User Manual was clear, and there was no evidence that marking of valves or post-leak conduct by ENP caused loss. The claim had no real prospect of success and summary judgment was granted to the second defendant.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted to the second defendant; claim against ENP dismissed.

Orders

  • Claim against Emerson Network Power Limited dismissed.
  • No need to consider conditional order for security for costs due to dismissal.