CR Construction (UK) Limited v Barclays Bank PLC [2026] EWHC 228 (TCC)

This judgment followed the refusal of the contractor's application to restrain payment under a performance bond. It dealt with the consequential questions of costs and whether to stay the order pending any appeal.

HHJ Stephen Davies declined to grant a stay. He was satisfied that this was not an appropriate case for a stay, even for a short period, because a stay against an order that simply refused an injunction would achieve nothing: it would not itself prevent payment under the bond. He therefore refused the stay and dealt with the summary assessment of costs.

The case is a reminder that a stay is only useful where it preserves something. A stay of an order that merely declines to grant an injunction gives the applicant no protection, and the court will refuse it.

HHJ Stephen Davies held: "I am not going to grant a stay of the order pending any appeal".