Deutsche Bahn AG & Ors, Re [2013] EWCA Civ 1484 (20 November 2013)

Deutsche Bahn AG & Ors, Re [2013] EWCA Civ 1484 (20 November 2013)

Given the complexity of the litigation, the assistance provided by the respondents' submissions, and the avoidance of unnecessary substantive appeal costs, the respondents are entitled to their costs, assessed at £25,000 net of VAT, with appellants jointly and severally liable.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 1484
Parties
Claimants/respondents: Deutsche Bahn AG and others; Defendant/appellant: Morgan Advanced Materials plc (formerly Morgan Crucible Company plc); Appellant/defendant: Schunk GmbH; Appellant/defendant: Schunk Kohlenstofftechnik GmbH; Appellant/defendant: SGL Carbon SE (formerly SGL Carbon AG); Appellant/defendant: Mersen SA (formerly Le Carbone-Lorraine SA); Appellant/defendant: Hoffmann & Co Elektrokohle AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Ruling on Costs Following Oral Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Respondents awarded costs; appellants jointly and severally liable.
Legal Topics
Costs, Permission to Appeal, Discretion in Costs Orders
Competition Law Civil Procedure Costs Permission to Appeal Discretion in Costs Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deutsche Bahn AG and others

Claimants/respondents

Morgan Advanced Materials plc (formerly Morgan Crucible Company plc)

Defendant/appellant

Schunk GmbH

Appellant/defendant

Schunk Kohlenstofftechnik GmbH

Appellant/defendant

SGL Carbon SE (formerly SGL Carbon AG)

Appellant/defendant

Mersen SA (formerly Le Carbone-Lorraine SA)

Appellant/defendant

Hoffmann & Co Elektrokohle AG

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Ruling on Costs Following Oral Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should award costs to respondents following an oral application for permission to appeal heard on notice
  2. 2 Whether the amount of costs claimed by respondents is reasonable and proportionate
  3. 3 Whether liability for costs should be joint and several among appellants

Ratio Decidendi

Given the complexity of the litigation, the assistance provided by the respondents' submissions, and the avoidance of unnecessary substantive appeal costs, the respondents are entitled to their costs, assessed at £25,000 net of VAT, with appellants jointly and severally liable.

Court Disposition

Respondents awarded costs; appellants jointly and severally liable.

Orders

  • Respondents recover £25,000 net of VAT as costs of and occasioned by the unsuccessful applications for permission to appeal.
  • Appellants are jointly and severally liable for the costs.