South Bank Hotel Management Company Ltd v Galliard Hotels Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 3544 (Ch) (12 November 2024)

South Bank Hotel Management Company Ltd v Galliard Hotels Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 3544 (Ch) (12 November 2024)

The court refused to grant the broad declaration sought by Galliard due to risk of unintended consequences and lack of full exploration at trial. Lodgeshine was not entitled to indemnity for all Main Claim costs under the Underlease due to evidential gaps. Clause 4.4.1 of the Underlease entitled Lodgeshine to indemnity costs for the Rent Claim. Costs of the Main Claim were awarded to Galliard on the standard basis up to 15 May 2024 and on the indemnity basis thereafter, due to SBHMC's persistence with fraud allegations after disclosure. Galliard's recoverable costs of the Main Claim were reduced by 15% to reflect partial success by SBHMC. Part 36 consequences applied in the Rent Claim,...

Citation
[2024] EWHC 3544 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant (main Claim) / Defendant (counterclaim): South Bank Hotel Management Company Limited; Defendant (main Claim): Galliard Hotels Limited; Defendant (main Claim): Stephen Stuart Solomon Conway; Defendant (main Claim): Christopher John Duffy; Defendant (main Claim) / Claimant (counterclaim): Lodgeshine Limited; Defendant (main Claim): Galliard Homes Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (chancery Division) / Post Trial, Consequential Matters and Costs
Outcome
Declaration refused; costs orders made as specified; permission to appeal refused; limited stay granted.
Legal Topics
Costs, Indemnity Costs, Standard Basis Costs, Rectification, Fraud Allegations, Disclosure, Part 36 Offers, Limitation, Stay of Execution
Property Law Contract Law Trusts Law Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Standard Basis Costs Rectification +5 more

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

Parties

South Bank Hotel Management Company Limited

Claimant (main Claim) / Defendant (counterclaim)

Galliard Hotels Limited

Defendant (main Claim)

Stephen Stuart Solomon Conway

Defendant (main Claim)

Christopher John Duffy

Defendant (main Claim)

Lodgeshine Limited

Defendant (main Claim) / Claimant (counterclaim)

Galliard Homes Limited

Defendant (main Claim)

Procedural Posture

Civil (chancery Division) / Post Trial, Consequential Matters and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a declaration should be made extinguishing SBHMC's equitable interest in Lodgeshine's leasehold title
  2. 2 Whether Lodgeshine is contractually entitled to indemnity costs under the Underlease for the Main Claim and Rent Claim
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded on the indemnity or standard basis and from what date

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to grant the broad declaration sought by Galliard due to risk of unintended consequences and lack of full exploration at trial. Lodgeshine was not entitled to indemnity for all Main Claim costs under the Underlease due to evidential gaps. Clause 4.4.1 of the Underlease entitled Lodgeshine to indemnity costs for the Rent Claim. Costs of the Main Claim were awarded to Galliard on the standard basis up to 15 May 2024 and on the indemnity basis thereafter, due to SBHMC's persistence with fraud allegations after disclosure. Galliard's recoverable costs of the Main Claim were reduced by 15% to reflect partial success by SBHMC. Part 36 consequences applied in the Rent Claim,...

Court Disposition

Declaration refused; costs orders made as specified; permission to appeal refused; limited stay granted.

Orders

  • No declaration extinguishing SBHMC's equitable interest granted.
  • No order for costs on compromised disclosure and expert applications.