Whitney v Monster Worldwide Ltd & Anor

Whitney v Monster Worldwide Ltd & Anor

There was no good reason to depart from the normal rule that the claimant pays the defendant’s costs upon discontinuance. The claim against the Trustees was speculative and weak, there was no misconduct by Monster in disclosure, and the claims against Monster and the Trustees were not sufficiently connected to justify a Bullock order. Mr Whitney must pay the Trustees’ costs and is not entitled to indemnity from Monster.

Parties
Claimant: Robert Leslie Hope Whitney; First Defendant: Monster Worldwide Limited; Second Defendant: MSL Group (Trustees) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial Costs Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed; normal costs order applies
Legal Topics
Discontinuance of Proceedings, Costs Orders, Bullock Order, Disclosure Obligations, Pension Entitlements
Civil Procedure Employment Law Pensions Law Discontinuance of Proceedings Costs Orders Bullock Order Disclosure Obligations Pension Entitlements

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Leslie Hope Whitney

Claimant

Monster Worldwide Limited

First Defendant

MSL Group (Trustees) Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the normal rule on costs following discontinuance should be displaced
  2. 2 Whether Monster should indemnify Mr Whitney for costs payable to the Trustees (Bullock order)
  3. 3 Whether there was any misconduct or unreasonable conduct by Monster or the Trustees justifying a departure from the normal costs rule

Ratio Decidendi

There was no good reason to depart from the normal rule that the claimant pays the defendant’s costs upon discontinuance. The claim against the Trustees was speculative and weak, there was no misconduct by Monster in disclosure, and the claims against Monster and the Trustees were not sufficiently connected to justify a Bullock order. Mr Whitney must pay the Trustees’ costs and is not entitled to indemnity from Monster.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; normal costs order applies

Orders

  • Mr Whitney to pay the Trustees’ costs to the date of discontinuance on a standard basis
  • No Bullock order; Monster not required to indemnify Mr Whitney for costs payable to the Trustees