Millharbour Management Ltd & Ors v Weston Homes Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 661 (TCC) (22 March 2011)

Millharbour Management Ltd & Ors v Weston Homes Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 661 (TCC) (22 March 2011)

Ms Hills and Ms Truchan have the same interest as the leaseholders they seek to represent regarding claims for damages relating to the cost of remedial works organised by MML and to be charged via service charges. The representative order is appropriate, limited to claims arising after 7 December 2010, and does not prejudice limitation defences for claims already time-barred by that date.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 661 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Millharbour Management Limited; Claimant: Swan Housing Association Limited; Claimant: Jonathan Lamb; Claimant: Elzbieta Urszula Truchan; Defendant: Weston Homes Limited; Defendant: Weston Homes (41 Millharbour) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Interlocutory Application for Representative Action Order Under CPR 19.6
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Representative Actions, Defective Premises Act 1972, Service Charges, Limitation of Actions, Building Regulations, Leasehold Property
Civil Procedure Property Law Construction Law Representative Actions Defective Premises Act 1972 Service Charges Limitation of Actions Building Regulations +1 more

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Millharbour Management Limited

Claimant

Swan Housing Association Limited

Claimant

Jonathan Lamb

Claimant

Elzbieta Urszula Truchan

Claimant

Weston Homes Limited

Defendant

Weston Homes (41 Millharbour) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Interlocutory Application for Representative Action Order Under CPR 19.6

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants may proceed in a representative capacity under CPR 19.6 for leaseholders regarding remedial works costs to be charged via service charges
  2. 2 Whether claimants and represented parties have 'the same interest' as required by CPR 19.6
  3. 3 Whether limitation defences affect the appropriateness of a representative order

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Hills and Ms Truchan have the same interest as the leaseholders they seek to represent regarding claims for damages relating to the cost of remedial works organised by MML and to be charged via service charges. The representative order is appropriate, limited to claims arising after 7 December 2010, and does not prejudice limitation defences for claims already time-barred by that date.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Ms Hills and Ms Truchan may act as representative claimants under CPR 19.6 for relevant leaseholders, limited to claims for damages relating to the cost of remedial works organised by MML and to be charged via service charges, effective from 7 December 2010.
  • Representative order does not extend to other financial or legal claims of represented parties.