SCCSI - Knowledge Check

The Matière SAS v ABM Precast Solutions Ltd case represents a significant TCC decision that addresses crucial principles regarding Part 36 offers, enhanced costs consequences, and the application of CPR 36.17 in construction litigation. This case provides essential guidance on when courts will exercise discretion to refuse enhanced consequences under CPR 36.17(5), the treatment of mixed settlement offers covering both claims and counterclaims, and the proper approach to costs reduction based on conduct and partial success.

Case Background: The dispute arose from unpaid invoices totalling £373,295.06 for precast concrete products supplied by Matière to ABM. ABM admitted partial liability but raised a substantial counterclaim exceeding £4.8 million for alleged defective products. Matière made a Part 36 offer accepting £328,295.06 for the claim while offering nil on the counterclaim, which ABM rejected. The case proceeded to trial where Matière succeeded on the claim but ABM's counterclaim was dismissed.

Key Legal Points: The court established important precedents regarding the application of enhanced consequences under CPR 36.17, particularly the discretionary power under CPR 36.17(5) to refuse such consequences if unjust. The judgment clarifies the treatment of composite Part 36 offers that cover both claims and counterclaims, the approach to costs reduction arguments based on dishonest conduct, and the relationship between trial preparation overlap and proportionate costs awards. The case demonstrates the court's nuanced approach to Part 36 consequences in complex commercial litigation.