Biffa Waste Services Ltd & Anor v Maschinenfabrik Ernst Hese GmbH & Ors

Biffa Waste Services Ltd & Anor v Maschinenfabrik Ernst Hese GmbH & Ors

Biffa was the successful party on both liability and quantum. OT failed to engage meaningfully in pre-action protocol, quantum discussions, or settlement offers, and did not make Part 36 offers until late. There was no intentional exaggeration by Biffa. The costs incurred were not disproportionate given the complexity and dual trials. Therefore, the general rule applies and Biffa is entitled to its costs on a standard basis.

Parties
First Claimant: Biffa Waste Services Limited; Second Claimant: Biffa Leicester Limited; First Defendant: Maschinenfabrik Ernst Hese GMBH; Second Defendant: Outokumpu Technology Wenmec AB; Third Party: Vanguard Industrial Limited (Trading as Pickfords Vanguard) (in voluntary liquidation); Fourth Party: Hese Umwelt GMBH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs awarded to claimants (Biffa) against second defendant (OT) on standard basis, if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Quantum, Liability, Pre Action Protocol, Part 36 Offers
Civil Procedure Construction Law Costs Quantum Liability Pre Action Protocol Part 36 Offers

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 8 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Biffa Waste Services Limited

First Claimant

Biffa Leicester Limited

Second Claimant

Maschinenfabrik Ernst Hese GMBH

First Defendant

Outokumpu Technology Wenmec AB

Second Defendant

Vanguard Industrial Limited (Trading as Pickfords Vanguard) (in voluntary liquidation)

Third Party

Hese Umwelt GMBH

Fourth Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the successful claimant should recover costs despite recovering substantially less than claimed
  2. 2 Effect of conduct, offers, and pre-action protocol compliance on costs order

Ratio Decidendi

Biffa was the successful party on both liability and quantum. OT failed to engage meaningfully in pre-action protocol, quantum discussions, or settlement offers, and did not make Part 36 offers until late. There was no intentional exaggeration by Biffa. The costs incurred were not disproportionate given the complexity and dual trials. Therefore, the general rule applies and Biffa is entitled to its costs on a standard basis.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to claimants (Biffa) against second defendant (OT) on standard basis, if not agreed.

Orders

  • Biffa to have its costs of the action, assessed on standard basis if not agreed.
  • Payment on account of costs ordered in the sum of £300,000.