Landfast (Anglia) Ltd. v Cameron Taylor One Ltd. [2008] EWHC 343 (TCC) (26 February 2008)

Landfast (Anglia) Ltd. v Cameron Taylor One Ltd. [2008] EWHC 343 (TCC) (26 February 2008)

The application for summary judgment was dismissed because each head of loss pleaded by the claimant was at least arguable on the facts and law, and none could be said to have no real prospect of success at this interlocutory stage. The assignment of the cause of action allowed the claimant to claim for its own loss, the pleaded diminution in value was just arguable, and the financing and management costs, though high, could not be struck out without evidence at trial.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 343 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Landfast (Anglia) Limited; Defendant: Cameron Taylor One Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed
Legal Topics
Assignment of Causes of Action, Professional Negligence, Damages, Summary Judgment, Pleading Requirements
Contract Law Tort Law Civil Procedure Assignment of Causes of Action Professional Negligence Damages Summary Judgment Pleading Requirements

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

Parties

Landfast (Anglia) Limited

Claimant

Cameron Taylor One Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's pleaded heads of loss have a real prospect of success and should be struck out or summarily dismissed under CPR Part 24
  2. 2 Whether an assignee can recover losses suffered by itself where the cause of action arose with the assignor
  3. 3 Whether the pleaded diminution in value and financing costs are sustainable as a matter of law and fact

Ratio Decidendi

The application for summary judgment was dismissed because each head of loss pleaded by the claimant was at least arguable on the facts and law, and none could be said to have no real prospect of success at this interlocutory stage. The assignment of the cause of action allowed the claimant to claim for its own loss, the pleaded diminution in value was just arguable, and the financing and management costs, though high, could not be struck out without evidence at trial.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant's application for summary judgment is dismissed.