MW High Tech Projects UK Limited v Outotec (USA) Inc & Ors
[2023] EWHC 2885 (TCC)
Outotec (USA) Inc & Anor v MW High Tech Projects UK Limited
24 July 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 844
Court of Appeal
A company (MW) sued another (Outotec) for lying, but only after losing a previous case. Even though MW should have raised the lying issue earlier, the court said it wasn't unfair to Outotec to let the new case proceed because there was little overlap with the first case, and Outotec was already facing similar lawsuits anyway.
Key Facts
- •MW High Tech Projects UK Limited (MW) entered into a sub-contract with Outotec (USA) Inc (Outotec) to supply plant for a waste-to-energy project in Hull.
- •The project was significantly delayed, leading to the termination of the main contract and subsequent litigation (the Main Action).
- •After the Main Action concluded with judgments largely against MW, they commenced new proceedings against Outotec alleging fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, seeking £166.9m in damages.
- •Outotec sought to strike out the new proceedings as an abuse of process.
- •The judge at first instance refused to strike out the claim.
- •Outotec appealed this decision.
Legal Principles
Henderson v Henderson principle: A party must bring their whole case against another party in a single action.
Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100
Johnson v Gore Wood principle: Abuse of process requires a broad, merits-based judgment considering public and private interests and whether a party is misusing court process.
Johnson v Gore Wood [2000] UKHL 65
Aldi guidelines: In ongoing litigation, a party with potential connected claims must raise them with the court. Breach of these guidelines increases the risk of the second action being struck out as abuse of process.
Aldi Stores Ltd v WSP Group PLC [2007] EWCA Civ 1260
Denton v TH White: When considering striking out applications, especially with Aldi guideline breaches, consider the seriousness of the breach, reasons for it, and all circumstances (including consequences of sanction).
Denton v TH White Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 906
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Court of Appeal held that while MW breached the Aldi guidelines, the judge at first instance correctly applied a broad merits-based assessment. The absence of significant overlap between the Main Action and the new claims, the hypothetical possibility of the misrepresentation claims being dealt with separately even if raised earlier, and the existence of similar claims related to other projects meant that the new proceedings did not constitute an abuse of process.
Similar Cases
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v JF Emmott & Ors
[2024] EWCA Civ 86
C. CHRISTO & CO LIMITED v NICHOLAS CHRISTOFOROU & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 1094 (KB)
Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Limited v Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Limited & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 166 (TCC)
Maia Luxury Limited v Luxierge Limited & Anor
[2024] EWHC 454 (KB)