The Court of Appeal held that discussions between the parties about sharing costs of a sewerage pumping station did not give rise to a binding oral agreement, and that the appellant was not entitled to equitable contribution because no common obligation to the local council to augment the sewerage system was established. However, the Court allowed the appeal on costs, holding that where a substantial counter-claim was abandoned at the start of trial, the appropriate order was that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the counter-claim rather than each party bearing its own costs.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.