Harding (t/a M J Harding Contractors) v Paice & Anor

Harding (t/a M J Harding Contractors) v Paice & Anor

The Claimant's application for injunction failed on the second ground as the proposed adjudication was not barred by the previous decision. Costs were apportioned according to parties' agreement, and permission to appeal was refused due to lack of real prospect of success and absence of compelling reasons.

Parties
Claimant: Matthew Harding (t/a M J Harding Contractors); Defendant: Gary George Leslie Paice; Defendant: Kim Springall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction and Costs Assessment / Post Hearing Judgment on Costs and Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Claimant's application for injunction dismissed on substantive issue; costs assessed and apportioned; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Adjudication, Costs Assessment, Permission to Appeal, Pay Less Notice, Contract Interpretation
Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Costs Assessment Permission to Appeal Pay Less Notice Contract Interpretation

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Harding (t/a M J Harding Contractors)

Claimant

Gary George Leslie Paice

Defendant

Kim Springall

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction and Costs Assessment / Post Hearing Judgment on Costs and Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Defendants complied with previous adjudication decision
  2. 2 Whether proposed adjudication was barred by previous decision
  3. 3 Assessment of costs liability

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant's application for injunction failed on the second ground as the proposed adjudication was not barred by the previous decision. Costs were apportioned according to parties' agreement, and permission to appeal was refused due to lack of real prospect of success and absence of compelling reasons.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for injunction dismissed on substantive issue; costs assessed and apportioned; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay Claimant's reasonable costs up to receipt of letter dated 27 October 2014, assessed at £13,497.50.
  • Claimant to pay Defendants' reasonable costs after receipt of letter dated 27 October 2014, assessed at £5,610.