[2024] EWHC 3625 (TCC)
Technology and Construction Court

[2024] EWHC 3625 (TCC)

Fecha: 13-Sep-2024

Procedure

Procedure

129.

On 15 December 2022, the Claimants’ solicitors issued a Part 7 Claim seeking Orders for specific performance of Option Agreements C and F (the Part 7 Claim). The Defendants filed a Defence and Counterclaim on 15 February 2023 (seeking in the counterclaim declarations that the various purported exercises of Options C and F were invalid).

130.

The first Case Management Conference was listed to be heard on 27 April 2023, but it was adjourned (by consent) pending determination of a reverse Summary Judgment application dated 14 April 2023 made by the Defendants in relation to the Part 7 Claim.

131.

I heard the Summary Judgment application and gave judgment on 6 July 2023. I did not accede to the application. However, I concluded that, whilst it might have been open to me to grant Summary Judgment in the Defendants’ favour on certain issues, given the interconnection between the various contentious matters and the background factual issues, it was preferable for the claim to proceed to trial. I made an order of costs in the case in relation to the application.

132.

I relisted the Case Management Conference to be heard in October 2023. However, shortly before the hearing, Orchard House issued a claim under Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules (the Part 8 Claim) by which it seeks to set aside Mr Wilson’s determination in relation to Plot C.

133.

Initially, the Defendants’ position was that the Part 8 Claim should be stayed, pending the outcome of the Part 7 Claim. The Claimants argued that both sets of proceedings should be determined at the same time.

134.

I ordered that the two sets of proceedings should be case managed and tried together. I also made a Costs Management Order based on the parties’ consolidated budgets.

135.

The claims were issued in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC). Whilst their subject matter does not fall within the core business of the TCC, I did not see any need to transfer them to another division of the High Court, as expert evidence from valuation experts was involved and it was more straightforward to case manage the claims within the TCC.