Intrigue Shipping Inc & Ors v Nikitin & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 749 (27 June 2013)

Intrigue Shipping Inc & Ors v Nikitin & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 749 (27 June 2013)

The judge did not err in principle by making no order as to costs in the Intrigue action. He properly considered the extent of the claimants' success and their conduct, including dishonesty and unsatisfactory disclosure, and was entitled to depart from the general rule. The interconnected nature of the actions and the claimants' conduct justified the decision.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 749
Parties
Claimants/appellants: Intrigue Shipping Inc and others; Defendants/respondents: Yuri Nikitin and others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Fraud, Conspiracy, Dishonest Assistance, Knowing Receipt
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Costs Fraud Conspiracy Dishonest Assistance Knowing Receipt

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

Parties

Intrigue Shipping Inc and others

Claimants/appellants

Yuri Nikitin and others

Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in principle by making no order as to costs in the Intrigue action despite partial success by the claimants
  2. 2 Whether the judge wrongly conflated conduct and issues between the Fiona and Intrigue actions
  3. 3 Whether the claimants' conduct justified departure from the general rule on costs

Ratio Decidendi

The judge did not err in principle by making no order as to costs in the Intrigue action. He properly considered the extent of the claimants' success and their conduct, including dishonesty and unsatisfactory disclosure, and was entitled to depart from the general rule. The interconnected nature of the actions and the claimants' conduct justified the decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs in the Intrigue action; each party to bear its own costs