Scenic International Group Limited (In Provisional Liquidation) v Richard Adenaike & Ors

Scenic International Group Limited (In Provisional Liquidation) v Richard Adenaike & Ors

Summary assessment is appropriate for routine interim applications; costs claimed were disproportionate and unreasonable; failure to serve costs schedule in time without reasonable excuse warrants reduction; costs assessed at £23,235.

Parties
Claimant: Scenic International Group Limited (In Provisional Liquidation); First Defendant: Richard Adenaike; Second Defendant: Andrew Peters; Third Defendant: AIGG Holdings Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Employment Law & HR Solutions Ltd; Fifth Defendant: Joyce Ezed; Sixth Defendant: Brasaa Corporation U. K. Limited; Seventh Defendant: Sam Adenaike (also known as Samuel Adenaike and Samuel Babs Adenaike and also known as Sammo Adenaike); Eighth Defendant: Leah Adenaike
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Ruling
Outcome
Costs assessed and awarded to Claimant.
Legal Topics
Costs Assessment, Freezing Orders, Summary Assessment, Proportionality of Costs
Civil Procedure Company Law Costs Assessment Freezing Orders Summary Assessment Proportionality of Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scenic International Group Limited (In Provisional Liquidation)

Claimant

Richard Adenaike

First Defendant

Andrew Peters

Second Defendant

AIGG Holdings Ltd

Third Defendant

Employment Law & HR Solutions Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Joyce Ezed

Fifth Defendant

Brasaa Corporation U. K. Limited

Sixth Defendant

Sam Adenaike (also known as Samuel Adenaike and Samuel Babs Adenaike and also known as Sammo Adenaike)

Seventh Defendant

Leah Adenaike

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be summarily assessed or subject to detailed assessment
  2. 2 Proportionality and reasonableness of solicitors' and counsel's fees
  3. 3 Compliance with Practice Direction 44 regarding costs schedule

Ratio Decidendi

Summary assessment is appropriate for routine interim applications; costs claimed were disproportionate and unreasonable; failure to serve costs schedule in time without reasonable excuse warrants reduction; costs assessed at £23,235.

Court Disposition

Costs assessed and awarded to Claimant.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay Claimant's costs assessed at £23,235.