Author Archives: Tim Killen

Amendments to Pleadings: Al Nahda Insulation Contracting LLC & Another v Tremco Illbruck Export Ltd

In Al Nahda, the TCC has maintained its strict approach to late amendments, and those which it does not consider have any real prospect of success. Continue reading

Comments Off

Filed under Particulars of Claim, Pleadings, Procedure, Statements of Case


A new pre-action protocol (available here) applicable to TCC claims comes into force on 9th November 2016 (the “Protocol”). The Protocol was released at a joint TeCSA and TECBAR event held in Court  26 of the Rolls Building on 2nd November which was chaired by The Honourable Mr Justice Coulson, Judge in Charge of the TCC.

Continue reading

Comments Off

Filed under Uncategorized

From 1 October 2015: The Consumer Rights Act 2015

It is of importance to anyone who deals with consumer contracts to know that many of the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “Act”) are due to come into force tomorrow, 1st October 2015.

In the property damage context, it is common for such consumer contracts to play a key role where allegations that, for instance, a faulty electrical item has caused a fire, or a badly-plumbed pipe has caused an escape of water, are regularly encountered. Continue reading

Comments Off

Filed under Contractual interpretation, Insurance

Gotch v Enelco Ltd – The dangers of using the threat of adjudication to leverage settlements

It is not uncommon for parties to use the threat of enforcing dispute resolution clauses as a means of leveraging favourable settlement agreements. The recent decision of Edwards-Stuart J in Gotch v Enelco Ltd [2015] EWHC 1802 (TCC) may, however, act as a salutary warning to those considering such an approach.

In Gotch, the Claimants had engaged the Defendant to construct two residential properties. One of the properties was to be marketed as a holiday let.

Continue reading

Comments Off

Filed under ADR, Procedure, Settlement

Guidance from the TCC on dealing with unreliable budgets: CIP Properties, part II

On 5th March 2015, Coulson J handed down the second costs judgment in the case of CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd and Others [2015] EWHC 481 (TCC).

In the previous decision on costs in this matter ([2014] EWHC 3546 (TCC)), the parties were ordered to prepare costs budgets, even though the value of the claim was in excess of the £10million cap in CPR 3.12. In this most recent decision, the Court was tasked with assessing the parties’ budgeted figures.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Costs & Cost Budgets