Mulalley & Co Limited v Sto Limited & Anor [2026] EWHC 1552 (TCC) Knowledge Check

SCCSI
(Providing Elite Certification Programmes to Construction Professionals Since 2009)
Explore Our Construction Claims and Contracts Certification Programmes
Presented by
Society of Construction Claims
Specialists International
sccsinternational.org
Mulalley & Co Limited v Sto Limited and Sto SE & Co KGaA
[2026] EWHC 1552 (TCC) | Technology and Construction Court, London
Before The Honourable Mr Justice Pepperall | Heard 1 May 2026 | Handed down 22 June 2026
Knowledge Check
Quantifying a Cladding Contribution Claim After Default Judgment: Test Your Knowledge

This Knowledge Check tests your understanding of the decision of the Technology and Construction Court in Mulalley & Co Limited v Sto Limited and Sto SE & Co KGaA [2026] EWHC 1552 (TCC). The court had to put a figure on the contribution owed to a contractor by the supplier of a dangerous external cladding system, judgment in default having already been entered. The judgment matters to anyone running building safety litigation, because it shows how damages are assessed after a default judgment, how remedial costs are tested for causation and reasonableness, and how a just and equitable contribution is fixed against a product supplier.

Chelmer Housing Partnership Ltd engaged Mulalley under a contract of 30 December 2006 to design and build refurbishment works at Parkside Court in Chelmsford, including a new podium of 27 flats, the refurbishment of the 54 flat tower and external cladding using the StoTherm Classic System. After the Grenfell Tower fire the cladding was identified as defective, and on 22 December 2022 Mulalley settled with Chelmer, agreeing to strip and replace the cladding and to make certain payments. Mulalley then sought a contribution from Sto Limited, the British supplier, and, Sto having entered administration, pursued the German parent company for a building liability order. Waksman J entered default judgment against the parent on 8 December 2025 for damages to be assessed, and Mr Justice Pepperall assessed those damages at a hearing on 1 May 2026 at which the defendants did not appear.

The judgment applies Strachan v Gleaner Co Ltd on assessments following default judgment, Lunnun v Singh, Symes v St George's Healthcare NHS Trust and New Century Media Ltd v Makhlay on the binding effect of the pleaded liability, section 2(1) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 and Downs v Chappell on contribution, and the observations in Martlet v Mulalley on remedial costs and fire barrier defects. The court fixed the contribution at 87.5 per cent and gave judgment for GBP 1,772,312.17 with interest and costs.

This Knowledge Check covers
  • The Parkside Court refurbishment and the StoTherm Classic cladding system
  • The settlement with the building owner and the route to a building liability order
  • The default judgment and what remained live at the assessment
  • The Strachan principles on proving loss after default judgment
  • The pleadings as a proxy for the judgment on liability
  • How the expert evidence proved and moderated the costs incurred
  • The causation percentages applied to the remedial works
  • Reasonableness of remedial expenditure and the Martlet observations
  • The just and equitable contribution under the 1978 Act
  • Judgment sum, interest, the unpaid interim payment and costs
Choose your Knowledge Check mode
Legal Disclaimer
This Knowledge Check is provided for educational and professional development purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The content reflects interpretations and analyses that may not apply to specific circumstances. Contract interpretation depends on specific wording, jurisdiction, and factual context. Always consult qualified legal professionals before making decisions based on this content. SCCSI and its contributors accept no liability for reliance on this material.