Angela Denise Curtiss & Ors. v Zurich Insurance Plc & Anor.

Angela Denise Curtiss & Ors. v Zurich Insurance Plc & Anor.

The application to strike out witness evidence was fundamentally inappropriate, disproportionate, and oppressive, with only modest merit in some points. The conduct of Zurich in pursuing the application justified an award of 75% of the claimants’ costs on the indemnity basis, as the application fell outside the ordinary and reasonable conduct of litigation.

Parties
Claimants: Angela Denise Curtiss and others; First Defendant: Zurich Insurance plc; Second Defendant: East West Insurance Company Limited (in administration)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Costs Ruling Following Application to Strike Out Witness Evidence
Outcome
Zurich to pay 75% of the claimants’ costs of the application, assessed on the indemnity basis. Zurich to recover no part of its own costs.
Legal Topics
Costs, Witness Evidence, Practice Direction 57 AC, Indemnity Costs, Case Management
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Costs Witness Evidence Practice Direction 57 AC Indemnity Costs Case Management

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angela Denise Curtiss and others

Claimants

Zurich Insurance plc

First Defendant

East West Insurance Company Limited (in administration)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Costs Ruling Following Application to Strike Out Witness Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to strike out witness evidence under CPR PD57AC was justified and proportionate
  2. 2 How costs should be awarded following partial success on the application

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out witness evidence was fundamentally inappropriate, disproportionate, and oppressive, with only modest merit in some points. The conduct of Zurich in pursuing the application justified an award of 75% of the claimants’ costs on the indemnity basis, as the application fell outside the ordinary and reasonable conduct of litigation.

Court Disposition

Zurich to pay 75% of the claimants’ costs of the application, assessed on the indemnity basis. Zurich to recover no part of its own costs.

Orders

  • Zurich to pay 75% of the claimants’ costs of the application, to be assessed on the indemnity basis.
  • Zurich not to recover any part of its own costs.