FTH Ltd v Varis Developments Ltd [2022] EWHC 1385 (TCC) (08 June 2022)

FTH Ltd v Varis Developments Ltd [2022] EWHC 1385 (TCC) (08 June 2022)

Summary judgment was refused because there is a real risk that enforcement of the adjudication awards would deprive Varis of security for its cross-claim, given FTH's financial position and the structure of its CVA. The court exercised its discretion under CPR Part 24.2 not to grant summary judgment, and alternatively found a compelling reason not to do so.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1385 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: FTH Limited; Defendant: Varis Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Enforcement (summary Judgment Application) / Judgment on Summary Judgment and Stay Application
Outcome
Summary judgment refused; no enforcement of adjudication awards at this stage.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Company Voluntary Arrangement (cva), Summary Judgment, Stay of Execution, Cross Claims
Construction Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Company Voluntary Arrangement (cva) Summary Judgment Stay of Execution Cross Claims

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FTH Limited

Claimant

Varis Developments Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Enforcement (summary Judgment Application) / Judgment on Summary Judgment and Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should summary judgment be granted to enforce adjudication awards in favour of a company subject to a CVA?
  2. 2 Is there a real risk that enforcement would deprive the defendant of security for its cross-claim?
  3. 3 Should a stay of execution be granted given the claimant's financial position?

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was refused because there is a real risk that enforcement of the adjudication awards would deprive Varis of security for its cross-claim, given FTH's financial position and the structure of its CVA. The court exercised its discretion under CPR Part 24.2 not to grant summary judgment, and alternatively found a compelling reason not to do so.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment refused; no enforcement of adjudication awards at this stage.

Orders

  • Counsel to agree the order arising from the judgment and any consequential matters; failing agreement, matters to be dealt with at a further short CVP hearing.