Easteye Ltd v Malhotra Property Investments Ltd & Ors

Easteye Ltd v Malhotra Property Investments Ltd & Ors

The Deputy District Judge's brief reasons for disallowing costs for leading counsel were sufficient in the context of costs management. The judge was entitled to prefer the defendants' submissions and conclude that the case did not justify leading counsel. There was no error of principle or unreasoned decision warranting appellate intervention.

Parties
Claimant: Easteye Limited; Defendants: Malhotra Property Investments Limited & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Costs Management Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Budgeting, Instruction of Leading Counsel, Reasonableness and Proportionality of Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Costs Budgeting Instruction of Leading Counsel Reasonableness and 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Easteye Limited

Claimant

Malhotra Property Investments Limited & Ors

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Costs Management Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy District Judge gave adequate reasons for refusing to approve costs for leading counsel in the claimant's trial phase
  2. 2 Whether the Deputy District Judge's decision on costs budgeting was wrong in principle or unreasoned

Ratio Decidendi

The Deputy District Judge's brief reasons for disallowing costs for leading counsel were sufficient in the context of costs management. The judge was entitled to prefer the defendants' submissions and conclude that the case did not justify leading counsel. There was no error of principle or unreasoned decision warranting appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The Deputy District Judge's order stands; costs for leading counsel in the claimant's trial phase are not approved beyond the fixed budget.