DWR Cymru Cyfyngedig (Welsh Water) v Corus UK Ltd

DWR Cymru Cyfyngedig (Welsh Water) v Corus UK Ltd

It is not an abuse of process for Corus to challenge the validity of the charges schemes in these proceedings as a defence to DCWW’s claim. The application for summary judgment is refused because Corus has a real prospect of success at trial on the issue of the validity of the charges schemes.

Parties
Claimant: DWR CYMRU CYFYNGEDIG (WELSH WATER); Defendant/part 20 Claimant: CORUS UK LIMITED; Second Part Defendant: THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF WATER SERVICES
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract/regulatory) / Application for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for summary judgment refused
Legal Topics
Water Supply Charges, Validity of Charges Schemes, Judicial Review Vs. Private Law Challenge, Abuse of Process, Discrimination in Tariffs, Summary Judgment Procedure
Contract Law Administrative Law Competition Law Regulatory Law Water Supply Charges Validity of Charges Schemes Judicial Review Vs. Private Law Challenge Abuse of Process +2 more

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

Parties

DWR CYMRU CYFYNGEDIG (WELSH WATER)

Claimant

CORUS UK LIMITED

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF WATER SERVICES

Second Part Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract/regulatory) / Application for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Corus is liable to pay charges under the non-potable industrial tariff for water supplied after expiry of special agreements
  2. 2 Whether the charges schemes lawfully and fairly apply to Corus sites
  3. 3 Whether Corus can challenge the validity of the charges schemes in these proceedings or only by judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

It is not an abuse of process for Corus to challenge the validity of the charges schemes in these proceedings as a defence to DCWW’s claim. The application for summary judgment is refused because Corus has a real prospect of success at trial on the issue of the validity of the charges schemes.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment refused