Amar Lodhia v Twelve Management Company (Bromley-by-Bow) Limited & Ors

Amar Lodhia v Twelve Management Company (Bromley-by-Bow) Limited & Ors

The claimant discontinued the proceedings and failed to show any good reason or unreasonable conduct by the defendants to displace the presumption under CPR 38.6. The defendants are entitled to their costs of the proceedings, all applications, and amendments, to be assessed on the standard basis. The claimant's arguments regarding bankruptcy, disability, pre-action conduct, and alleged unreasonable conduct by the defendants were rejected as not amounting to a relevant change of circumstances or justifying a different order. Interim payments on account of costs were ordered.

Parties
Claimant: Amar Lodhia; First Defendant: Twelve Trees Management Company (Bromley-by-Bow) Limited; Second Defendant: Urang Group Limited t/a Urang Property Management; Third Defendant: Mr Thomas Squires; Fourth Defendant: Mr Andrew Cregan; Fifth Defendant: Mr Tasleem Malleck-Amode
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation and Malicious Falsehood / Post Discontinuance, Costs and Consequential Directions
Outcome
Claim discontinued by claimant. Defendants awarded costs up to discontinuance. Further directions for evidence and liberty to apply.
Legal Topics
Discontinuance, Summary Disposal, Costs Orders, Bankruptcy and Litigation Capacity, Reasonable Adjustments, Pre Action Protocol Compliance
Defamation Civil Procedure Costs Discontinuance Summary Disposal Costs Orders Bankruptcy and Litigation Capacity Reasonable Adjustments +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amar Lodhia

Claimant

Twelve Trees Management Company (Bromley-by-Bow) Limited

First Defendant

Urang Group Limited t/a Urang Property Management

Second Defendant

Mr Thomas Squires

Third Defendant

Mr Andrew Cregan

Fourth Defendant

Mr Tasleem Malleck-Amode

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation and Malicious Falsehood / Post Discontinuance, Costs and Consequential Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant or defendants should bear the costs following discontinuance under CPR 38.6
  2. 2 Whether there was unreasonable conduct by either party justifying a departure from the usual costs order
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's bankruptcy or lasting power of attorney affected liability for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant discontinued the proceedings and failed to show any good reason or unreasonable conduct by the defendants to displace the presumption under CPR 38.6. The defendants are entitled to their costs of the proceedings, all applications, and amendments, to be assessed on the standard basis. The claimant's arguments regarding bankruptcy, disability, pre-action conduct, and alleged unreasonable conduct by the defendants were rejected as not amounting to a relevant change of circumstances or justifying a different order. Interim payments on account of costs were ordered.

Court Disposition

Claim discontinued by claimant. Defendants awarded costs up to discontinuance. Further directions for evidence and liberty to apply.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings up to the date of service of the notice of discontinuance, to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed.
  • Claimant to pay the costs of all applications to postpone, stay, and amend, and the costs of discontinuance against the Fourth and Fifth Defendants.