Boygues (UK) Ltd v Sharpfibre Ltd

Boygues (UK) Ltd v Sharpfibre Ltd

The court allowed BYUK's proposed contingent cost for written submissions in full, finding it was not included in the trial phase budget. The court limited disclosure between Sharpfibre and Mountford Pigott to the issue as formulated by Mountford Pigott and refused disclosure of narrative documents, determining such disclosure was not necessary for fair disposal of the issues.

Parties
Claimant: Bouygues (U.K.) Limited; Defendant: Sharpfibre Limited; Third Party: Mountford Pigott LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Case Management Conference (cmc) and Interim Directions
Outcome
Interim directions issued; cost budget and disclosure issues resolved.
Legal Topics
Defective Works, Contribution Claims, Disclosure, Cost Budgeting
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Defective Works Contribution Claims Disclosure Cost Budgeting

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

Parties

Bouygues (U.K.) Limited

Claimant

Sharpfibre Limited

Defendant

Mountford Pigott LLP

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Case Management Conference (cmc) and Interim Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cladding and insulation installed by Sharpfibre were non-compliant with Building Regulations and the sub-contract
  2. 2 Whether Mountford Pigott failed to verify or identify non-compliance in the design and specification of the cladding and insulation
  3. 3 Appropriate cost budgeting for written submissions

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed BYUK's proposed contingent cost for written submissions in full, finding it was not included in the trial phase budget. The court limited disclosure between Sharpfibre and Mountford Pigott to the issue as formulated by Mountford Pigott and refused disclosure of narrative documents, determining such disclosure was not necessary for fair disposal of the issues.

Court Disposition

Interim directions issued; cost budget and disclosure issues resolved.

Orders

  • BYUK's contingent cost for written submissions allowed in full.
  • Disclosure between Sharpfibre and Mountford Pigott limited to issue as formulated by Mountford Pigott.