European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Ltd v Treon & Anor [2021] EWHC 3514 (Ch) (14 December 2021)

European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Ltd v Treon & Anor [2021] EWHC 3514 (Ch) (14 December 2021)

Defendants are the successful parties as claims were dismissed as statute-barred; proven deceit and dishonest evidence by defendants justify substantial reduction in costs payable to them, but not full reversal; claimant's own conduct and partial failure on some issues also relevant; just order is no order as to costs.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3514 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Limited (In Liquidation); First Defendant: Anoup Treon; Second Defendant: Arundel Group Limited; Third Defendant: Dr Doraiswamy Srinivas
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Litigation / Post Trial Consequential Judgment (costs and Permission to Appeal)
Outcome
No order as to costs; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Costs, Limitation, Fraud, Deceit, Permission to Appeal
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Costs Limitation Fraud Deceit Permission to Appeal

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Limited (In Liquidation)

Claimant

Anoup Treon

First Defendant

Arundel Group Limited

Second Defendant

Dr Doraiswamy Srinivas

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Litigation / Post Trial Consequential Judgment (costs and Permission to Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate costs order following dismissal of claim as statute-barred
  2. 2 Effect of proven deceit and dishonest evidence on costs
  3. 3 Interpretation and application of section 32 Limitation Act 1980

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants are the successful parties as claims were dismissed as statute-barred; proven deceit and dishonest evidence by defendants justify substantial reduction in costs payable to them, but not full reversal; claimant's own conduct and partial failure on some issues also relevant; just order is no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • No order as to costs between parties.
  • Permission to appeal refused.