Wrongly accused of law breaking

  • Posted

Gannons successfully defended in court a client who had been wrongfully accused of law breaking.

Our client was planning to excavate and construct a new basement for his property in a wealthy part of London, and thereby extend the back of his house. He had obtained all of the usual pre-work approvals to legally carry out the modifications to his home. His neighbours, however, believed the foundations breached building regulations. Our client was then accused of law breaking over this. Perhaps motivated by the inconvenience caused by the building work, together they sued our client serving “expert” reports to make it appear as if they were in the right.

How the case proceeded

We instructed an expert to prepare a report on the level and operation of the foundations. We then briefed counsel on the case and put forward a settlement offer that protected our client’s costs position. Then we prepared for, and won, at trial. This recovered our client’s costs on the indemnity basis, which was a consequence of the claimant refusing our client’s settlement offers. Had we lost the case, our client’s building costs would have exponentially increased, possibly preventing our client from completing the project.

Examination of the evidence

Before proceeding with litigation, we honestly and critically reviewed the evidence. There wasn’t a published legal decision about a case that’s the same as this one, otherwise the dispute would not have arisen. We paid special attention to how the evidence would play out in court.

Using evidence to your advantage

To win, the evidence and legal authorities must point in your favour. After reviewing the evidence, we considered what legal authority was available to support the likely arguments that would be advanced in court.

Use of experts

The Court gave permission to rely on expert evidence. Our challenge was to ensure the expert we instructed was suitable to address the issue at hand. A carefully selected, properly deployed expert can be an invaluable forensic tool in litigation. In this case, the matter in dispute had to be determined by an expert. We obtained an expert’s report which we used to support our client’s legal arguments.

Selecting counsel

Choosing a barrister to represent the case at court is difficult. Barristers are well known as the ‘personalities’ who present clear arguments on intricate legal points and deliver clear strategies for winning at court.
Our expertise ensured the barrister we instructed possessed an in-depth and intricate knowledge of the case, and the regulations.


Prior to litigation, parties should resolve disputes, so far as possible, without going to Court. We knew this would be difficult. The other side were using this case to obtain an authority from the Court. However, mediation should always be considered as it can affect costs at the end of the trial.

Tactical settlement offers

Consequently, we put in tactical settlement offers that protected our client’s position on costs and limited our client’s exposure. We also went to mediation.


Mediation can be used to successfully resolve disputes such as these. Furthermore, it can reduce future acrimony by identifying and resolving the key issues. This can all save on having to proceed with litigation, which is time consuming, difficult, and expensive.

However, this was one of the few cases where mediation was unsuccessful. Possibly because the other side were using this matter as a test case and wanted their day in court.

We knew that the claimants would likely seek to rely on evidence shown at the mediation to their advantage at trial. We ensured that all documents exchanged at the mediation were “without prejudice”.


By ensuring we had built a robust team, we were successful at trial. The judge found that the works our client was carrying out did not involve a reinforced underpinning, that constituted ‘special foundations’. Therefore our client completed his basement on his terms.


As the winning party, our client substantially recovered his costs. It is a regrettable feature of the UK legal system that even when you win you don’t recover all your costs.

Alex Kleanthous is the partner heading the dispute resolution team. Alex has significant experience of using the rules and procedures of the legal system to maximise positions.

  • The legal expertise provided by the team at Gannons was very impressive, and vital in securing a happy resolution for this case.

Related Expertise