Abuse of process and the Aldi guidelines

Outotec (USA) Inc and Metso OYJ (formerly Metso Outotec OYJ) v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 844

In Outotec (USA) Inc and Metso OYJ (formerly Metso Outotec OYJ) v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 844, the Court of Appeal held that a sub-contractor was not entitled to strike out a misrepresentation claim brought against it by the main contractor despite the fact that the main contractor both could and should have brought the misrepresentation claim in earlier proceedings between the parties and it breached the Aldi guidelines in failing to draw to the attention of the court the possible existence of this claim at the time of the earlier proceedings. Although these factors all suggested that the claim should be struck out as an abuse of process, the Court of Appeal declined to interfere with the finding of Judge Stephen Davies that this was not an appropriate case to strike out the claim. The reasons which led to this conclusion were that the misrepresentation claim did not overlap with the claim in the prior proceedings, the sub-contractors would have to face a trial on the misrepresentation issue in any event on a claim brought on another, similar project and the potential size of the claim (£165 million) which rendered it disproportionate to conclude that the claim should be struck out. This was not a case in which the finding at first instance could be said to be "perverse" and so there was no justification for an appellate court to intervene given that the factors which supported the conclusion of Judge Stephen Davies outweighed by a "small but still meaningful" margin the factors which suggested that the claim should be struck out.