Haji-Ioannou v Frangos & Ors

Haji-Ioannou v Frangos & Ors

Inordinate delay in commencing detailed assessment proceedings does not automatically justify the disallowance of costs under CPR 44.14(2)(a); such a sanction is only appropriate where the delay amounts to misconduct, causes prejudice, and is inexcusable. In this case, the delay, though inordinate, caused no prejudice and was not inexcusable given the context of ongoing Greek proceedings. The normal sanction of disallowance of interest suffices.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Loucas Haji-Ioannou; Respondents/defendants: Ioannis Frangos & ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal (costs Assessment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Assessment of Costs, Delay in Commencement of Detailed Assessment, Sanctions for Procedural Non Compliance, Interpretation of CPR 44.14 and 47.8
Civil Procedure Costs Assessment of Costs Delay in Commencement of Detailed Assessment Sanctions for Procedural Non Compliance Interpretation of CPR 44.14 and 47.8

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Loucas Haji-Ioannou

Appellant/claimant

Ioannis Frangos & ors

Respondents/defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal (costs Assessment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether inordinate delay in commencing detailed assessment of costs justifies disallowance of costs under CPR 44.14(2)(a)
  2. 2 Whether the only sanction for delay is disallowance of interest under CPR 47.8
  3. 3 How the discretion under CPR 44.14 should be exercised in cases of delay

Ratio Decidendi

Inordinate delay in commencing detailed assessment proceedings does not automatically justify the disallowance of costs under CPR 44.14(2)(a); such a sanction is only appropriate where the delay amounts to misconduct, causes prejudice, and is inexcusable. In this case, the delay, though inordinate, caused no prejudice and was not inexcusable given the context of ongoing Greek proceedings. The normal sanction of disallowance of interest suffices.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No disallowance of costs beyond the agreed disallowance of interest
  • Costs certificate for £326,996.48 stands