Summary

Application by the CPR Part 20 defendant ('HBB') to strike out a Part 20 claim brought against it by the respondent insurance brokers ('M&G'). The claimant in the action was the building and design contractor for the development of some industrial premises which developed subsidence problems. The claimant's case against M&G was that, contrary to the claimant's instructions, it had failed to procure appropriate insurance cover in respect of any liabilities for design that might be undertaken, whether by the claimant or by a subcontractor.

Facts

The claimant claimed against M&G the cost of remedying the subsidence problems, which it had borne out of its own pocket. HBB had been retained by the claimant to carry out a site investigation and to produce an interpretative report in relation thereto. M&G alleged that, in particular, HBB had been retained to advise on the correct foundation solution for the site, and that it was in breach of both its contractual and tortious duties to the claimant in that regard. M&G sought to recover in full from HBB such amount as it might be held liable to pay to the claimant.

Held

On the facts of the instant case, it was "plain and obvious" that the claim against M&G was for a very different kind of damage than the claim against HBB, albeit that the measure of damages might overlap, and the Part 20 claim should struck out.

Part 20 claim dismissed with costs. Applicant's request for permission to appeal refused.