Bay Mining Consultants Ltd v Patel & Ors [2021] EWHC 1607 (QB) (14 May 2021)

Bay Mining Consultants Ltd v Patel & Ors [2021] EWHC 1607 (QB) (14 May 2021)

The threshold for making a Civil Restraint Order was not met as there was only one order certified as totally without merit. There was insufficient material to make such an order against Mr Slater or Mr Baxendale. The Defendants were entitled to summary assessment of their costs following discontinuance, and there was no jurisdiction to order costs out of central funds in civil proceedings.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 1607 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Bay Mining Consultants Limited; First Defendant: Pankim Kumar Shankersai Patel; Second Defendant: Praslin Pictures Ltd; Third Defendant: Dawn Elizabeth Sheppard
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Discontinuance, Summary Assessment of Costs, Consideration of Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
Claim discontinued by Claimant; Defendants awarded costs; no Civil Restraint Order made.
Legal Topics
Civil Restraint Orders, Costs, Discontinuance, Summary Assessment, Bankruptcy Restrictions
Civil Procedure Civil Restraint Orders Costs Discontinuance Summary Assessment Bankruptcy Restrictions

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bay Mining Consultants Limited

Claimant

Pankim Kumar Shankersai Patel

First Defendant

Praslin Pictures Ltd

Second Defendant

Dawn Elizabeth Sheppard

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Discontinuance, Summary Assessment of Costs, Consideration of Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Civil Restraint Order should be made against the Claimant, Mr Slater, or Mr Baxendale
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants are entitled to summary assessment of costs following discontinuance
  3. 3 Jurisdiction to order costs out of central funds in civil proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The threshold for making a Civil Restraint Order was not met as there was only one order certified as totally without merit. There was insufficient material to make such an order against Mr Slater or Mr Baxendale. The Defendants were entitled to summary assessment of their costs following discontinuance, and there was no jurisdiction to order costs out of central funds in civil proceedings.

Court Disposition

Claim discontinued by Claimant; Defendants awarded costs; no Civil Restraint Order made.

Orders

  • Claim referred to Official Receiver for consideration in light of bankruptcy restrictions.
  • Claimant to pay Defendants' costs assessed at £13,194 within 14 days.