DBE Energy Ltd v Biogas Products Ltd

DBE Energy Ltd v Biogas Products Ltd

The court held that expert evidence must be limited to issues properly raised in the pleadings and within the expert's expertise. New arguments on causation or mitigation not previously pleaded are inadmissible. Only the argument regarding hydraulic separation as a means to mitigate loss for the second pasteuriser tank is allowed to proceed as it was sufficiently pleaded.

Parties
Claimant: DBE Energy Limited; Defendant: Biogas Products Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application Regarding Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
Objection to categories of expert evidence largely upheld; limited permission granted for specific issue.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Mitigation of Loss, Breach of Contract, Negligence
Contract Law Tort Law Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Mitigation of Loss Breach of Contract Negligence

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DBE Energy Limited

Claimant

Biogas Products Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application Regarding Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain categories of expert evidence served by the defendant are admissible
  2. 2 Whether the defendant can raise new arguments on causation and mitigation not pleaded
  3. 3 Scope of permissible expert evidence in relation to loss and damage

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that expert evidence must be limited to issues properly raised in the pleadings and within the expert's expertise. New arguments on causation or mitigation not previously pleaded are inadmissible. Only the argument regarding hydraulic separation as a means to mitigate loss for the second pasteuriser tank is allowed to proceed as it was sufficiently pleaded.

Court Disposition

Objection to categories of expert evidence largely upheld; limited permission granted for specific issue.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 6.22 to 6.25, 6.26 to 6.31, and category 4 of the defendant's expert report are struck out as inadmissible.
  • Category 1 (project management critique) is struck out.