Invenia Technical Computing Corporation & Anor v Matthew Hudson

Invenia Technical Computing Corporation & Anor v Matthew Hudson

There is good reason not to order a payment on account of costs because the applicant's claimed costs are not credible, reasonable, or proportionate, and the evidence does not support recovery at the claimed rate or for the claimed hours. Costs for unregulated legal services and the expert disbursement are not recoverable. The matter should be left for detailed assessment. The applicant must pay the respondents' costs of the extension of time application due to his unreasonable opposition.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Invenia Technical Computing Corporation; Claimant/respondent: Invenia Labs Limited; Defendant/applicant: Matthew Hudson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Payment on Account of Costs
Outcome
Application for payment on account of costs dismissed; costs of extension application awarded to respondents.
Legal Topics
Costs, Litigant in Person, Payment on Account, Detailed Assessment, Extension of Time
Civil Procedure Costs Litigant in Person Payment on Account Detailed Assessment Extension of Time

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Invenia Technical Computing Corporation

Claimant/respondent

Invenia Labs Limited

Claimant/respondent

Matthew Hudson

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Payment on Account of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a payment on account of costs under CPR r 44.2(8)
  2. 2 Whether the claimed costs are credible, reasonable, and proportionate
  3. 3 Whether costs for legal services provided by an unregulated person are recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

There is good reason not to order a payment on account of costs because the applicant's claimed costs are not credible, reasonable, or proportionate, and the evidence does not support recovery at the claimed rate or for the claimed hours. Costs for unregulated legal services and the expert disbursement are not recoverable. The matter should be left for detailed assessment. The applicant must pay the respondents' costs of the extension of time application due to his unreasonable opposition.

Court Disposition

Application for payment on account of costs dismissed; costs of extension application awarded to respondents.

Orders

  • No payment on account of costs to the applicant; costs to be assessed at the conclusion of the litigation.
  • Applicant to pay respondents' costs of the January 2024 extension of time application.