Voltaire Capital Holdings Limited & Ors v Eric Watson & Ors
Given the contested and substantial nature of the disclosure guidance hearing, the Claimants' overall success, and the disproportionate approach of the Second Defendant, the court departed from the default costs position and ordered the Second Defendant to pay the Claimants' costs, subject to a 10% reduction for limited success by the Second Defendant.
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Voltaire Capital Holdings Limited; Claimant/respondent: Gemini Investment Holding Limited; Claimant/respondent: Marchmont Limited (in its own capacity and as assignee of the VCUK Claims); Claimant/respondent: March CP Limited; Claimant/respondent: OS Capital Holding Ltd; Defendant/applicant: Eric Watson; Defendant/applicant: Krishan Rattan; Defendant/applicant: Miles Leahy; Defendant/applicant: Startrader Pro Limited; Defendant/applicant: SBL Holdings Limited; Defendant/applicant: Tim Connell; Defendant/applicant: William Gibson; Defendant/applicant: Shamyl Malik; Defendant/applicant: Ramy Soliman; Defendant/applicant: Sam Watson; Defendant/applicant: Notesco Financial Services Limited; Defendant/applicant: Notesco UK Limited; Defendant/applicant: Daniel Fields; Defendant/applicant: Green Fields Management LLP
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 July 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Court Application / Costs Determination Following Disclosure Guidance Hearing
- Outcome
- Second Defendant to pay Claimants' costs of the Disclosure Guidance Application, summarily assessed.
- Legal Topics
- Disclosure Guidance, Costs Orders, Case Management, Summary Assessment of Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Voltaire Capital Holdings Limited
Claimant/respondent
Gemini Investment Holding Limited
Claimant/respondent
Marchmont Limited (in its own capacity and as assignee of the VCUK Claims)
Claimant/respondent
March CP Limited
Claimant/respondent
OS Capital Holding Ltd
Claimant/respondent
Eric Watson
Defendant/applicant
Krishan Rattan
Defendant/applicant
Miles Leahy
Defendant/applicant
Startrader Pro Limited
Defendant/applicant
SBL Holdings Limited
Defendant/applicant
Tim Connell
Defendant/applicant
William Gibson
Defendant/applicant
Shamyl Malik
Defendant/applicant
Ramy Soliman
Defendant/applicant
Sam Watson
Defendant/applicant
Notesco Financial Services Limited
Defendant/applicant
Notesco UK Limited
Defendant/applicant
Daniel Fields
Defendant/applicant
Green Fields Management LLP
Defendant/applicant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Costs Determination Following Disclosure Guidance Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the default costs position under PD57AD paragraph 11.5 should be departed from in a disclosure guidance application
- 2 Whether the Claimants are entitled to their costs of the disclosure guidance hearing and in what amount
Ratio Decidendi
Given the contested and substantial nature of the disclosure guidance hearing, the Claimants' overall success, and the disproportionate approach of the Second Defendant, the court departed from the default costs position and ordered the Second Defendant to pay the Claimants' costs, subject to a 10% reduction for limited success by the Second Defendant.
Court Disposition
Second Defendant to pay Claimants' costs of the Disclosure Guidance Application, summarily assessed.
Orders
- Second Defendant to pay Claimants' costs summarily assessed at £63,267.00
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment