Cases - Amec Process and Energy Ltd v Stork Engineers & Contractors BV (No. 4) (CIP)
Record details
- Name
- Amec Process and Energy Ltd v Stork Engineers & Contractors BV (No. 4) (CIP)
- Date
- (2002)
- Citation
- CILL 1883
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Construction claim - loss and expense claim - costs - expert - Re Nossen's Letter Patent - party's employees - CPR 42.3(1)(a) - recoverability of costs
- Summary
-
In this claim relating to the laying of steel pipes in the North Sea oil fields, the claimant had engaged its own personnel to carry out much of the work involved in the collection and analysis of primary evidence. They also undertook much of the preparation of visual aids on behalf of the expert. HHJ Thornton QC held that:
- Cases such as Re Nossen's Letter Patent which pre-dated the CPR had little or no bearing on the interpretation and application of the CPR costs code.
- The time charges involved in employing the claimant's personnel came within the definition of 'fees, charges, disbursements, expenses, remunerations' for the purposes of CPR 43.2(1)(a).
- It would be contrary to the overriding objective if necessary expense which was incurred at a lower cost than if the claimant's solicitors' employees had undertaken the work was not recoverable.