[2025] EWHC 2307 (KB)

The co-ordination between defendants ought to be rather less than is required by the claimants. This work is only for co-ordination outside the specific phases that have been used and such work seems likely to be modest. That was the assumption of the drafters of the Renault budget and yet it is of a similar magnitude to the PCD budget where significant co-ordination was expected, albeit only “some co-ordination” was likely to be non-phase specific. The Mercedes budget set out a “burn rate” to justify their estimate. Inevitably it would depend upon the reasonableness of that burn rate generally. The upshot is that the Renault, PCD and Mercedes budgets in this phase are significantly higher than either Ford or Nissan, the other ALGLO defendants. We consider the Ford estimate is about right for this phase and we have allowed the claimants’ similar offer of £85,000 for the remaining budgets.

The only Non-ALGLO budget outstanding is that of Vauxhall. All other defendants have accepted offers of up to £25,000. It was submitted to us that the increased costs claimed owed much to the seriousness with which Vauxhall were taking the numerous claims they had received. As Mr Williams pointed out, the first CMH judgment described the number of claims being made as relevant to the individual rather than common costs. We think Mr Lyons’ argument for Vauxhall falls into the same category and so we have allowed £25,000 for this phase.