Judge: Jefford J
Citation:  EWHC 1222 (TCC)
A Claimant who sued two Defendants and the discontinued against the second, was liable for the second defendant’s costs. There was no good reason to depart from the normal rule.
A Claimant who sued two Defendants in connection with a construction dispute discontinued against the Second Defendant and sought an Order that the First Defendant should pay the Second Defendant’s costs. The Court held that the Claimant took the risk of issuing proceedings against the Second Defendant and its requests for clarification of that Defendant’s position could not transfer the risk to the First Defendant, which needed time to investigate the position. At the CMC, an Order was made with a view to clarifying whether the First Defendant would claim against the Second Defendant. There was no basis for suggesting the First Defendant should have complied with some other timetable that required it to do more and sooner. There was no good reason to depart from the usual Order for Costs on discontinuance. The Claimant was ordered to pay the Second Defendant’s costs.