Illiquidx Ltd v Altana Wealth Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 1627 (Ch) (30 June 2025)

Illiquidx Ltd v Altana Wealth Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 1627 (Ch) (30 June 2025)

Costs generally follow the event for each discrete application; the party unsuccessful on each application is to pay the successful party's costs unless there is a clear reason to depart from the rule. For disclosure applications, given partial success and the complexity, no order as to costs is appropriate. Orders on account of costs to be determined by agreement or further hearing.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1627 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: ILLIQUIDX LIMITED; Defendants: ALTANA WEALTH LIMITED & ORS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Costs Judgment Following Interlocutory Applications in Intellectual Property Litigation / Post Interlocutory, Pre Trial
Outcome
Multiple costs orders made: Defendants to pay claimant's costs of resisting strike out/summary judgment applications; claimant to pay defendants' costs of amendments and unsuccessful applications; no order as to costs on disclosure applications; costs on account to be determined.
Legal Topics
Costs, Disclosure, Pleadings Amendment, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Witness Evidence, Expert Evidence
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Costs Disclosure Pleadings Amendment Summary Judgment Strike Out Witness Evidence +1 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ILLIQUIDX LIMITED

Claimant

ALTANA WEALTH LIMITED & ORS

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Costs Judgment Following Interlocutory Applications in Intellectual Property Litigation / Post Interlocutory, Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate costs orders for multiple interlocutory applications including strike out/summary judgment, amendments to pleadings, disclosure, witness evidence compliance, and expert evidence applications

Ratio Decidendi

Costs generally follow the event for each discrete application; the party unsuccessful on each application is to pay the successful party's costs unless there is a clear reason to depart from the rule. For disclosure applications, given partial success and the complexity, no order as to costs is appropriate. Orders on account of costs to be determined by agreement or further hearing.

Court Disposition

Multiple costs orders made: Defendants to pay claimant's costs of resisting strike out/summary judgment applications; claimant to pay defendants' costs of amendments and unsuccessful applications; no order as to costs on disclosure applications; costs on account to be determined.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay claimant's costs of resisting strike out/summary judgment (AV Securities and injunctive relief) applications.
  • Claimant to pay defendants' costs of amendments to pleadings (AV Securities and other amendments).