Bechtel Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd ((No.2) Costs of the Interested Party)

Bechtel Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd ((No.2) Costs of the Interested Party)

BBVS is entitled to recover its costs for complying with confidentiality ring provisions and protecting its confidential information, as its participation was expressly provided for by court order and justified by the exceptional scale and sensitivity of the project. BBVS is not entitled to recover costs relating to the plea for a declaration of ineffectiveness, as there was no court order permitting such participation and no separate issue or interest distinct from HS2's.

Parties
Claimant: Bechtel Limited; Defendant: High Speed Two (HS2) Limited; Interested Party: Balfour Beatty Group Limited, Vinci Construction (UK) Limited, Vinci Construction Grands Projets, Systra Limited (BBVS)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Procurement Challenge / Costs Application / Post Liability Judgment; Application for Costs by Interested Party
Outcome
Application allowed in part; BBVS awarded costs for confidentiality ring compliance, refused costs for ineffectiveness plea.
Legal Topics
Costs, Interested Parties, Confidentiality, Procurement Litigation
Civil Procedure Public Procurement Costs Interested Parties Confidentiality Procurement Litigation

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

Parties

Bechtel Limited

Claimant

High Speed Two (HS2) Limited

Defendant

Balfour Beatty Group Limited, Vinci Construction (UK) Limited, Vinci Construction Grands Projets, Systra Limited (BBVS)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Procurement Challenge / Costs Application / Post Liability Judgment; Application for Costs by Interested Party

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether BBVS, as an interested party, is entitled to recover its costs from Bechtel under two heads: (1) costs of complying with confidentiality ring provisions and protecting confidential information; (2) costs relating to the plea for a declaration of ineffectiveness.

Ratio Decidendi

BBVS is entitled to recover its costs for complying with confidentiality ring provisions and protecting its confidential information, as its participation was expressly provided for by court order and justified by the exceptional scale and sensitivity of the project. BBVS is not entitled to recover costs relating to the plea for a declaration of ineffectiveness, as there was no court order permitting such participation and no separate issue or interest distinct from HS2's.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; BBVS awarded costs for confidentiality ring compliance, refused costs for ineffectiveness plea.

Orders

  • Bechtel to pay BBVS's costs of complying with confidentiality ring provisions and protecting confidential information, subject to detailed assessment on the standard basis if not agreed.
  • BBVS's application for costs relating to the plea for a declaration of ineffectiveness is dismissed.