Dardana Ltd v Yukos Oil Company [2002] EWCA Civ 584 (18 April 2002)
Neither party achieved its primary aim; the English proceedings achieved nothing substantive. The appropriate order is a single costs award in favour of Yukos Oil Company, subject to a 25% deduction to reflect points on which they did not succeed.
- Citation
- [2002] EWCA Civ 584
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Dardana Limited; Defendant/appellant: Yukos Oil Company
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 18 April 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Costs Determination Following Appeal
- Outcome
- Costs awarded to Yukos Oil Company at 75% of their total costs, to be assessed if not agreed, covering both first instance and appeal.
- Legal Topics
- Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Costs Orders, Security for Costs, Stay of Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dardana Limited
Claimant/respondent
Yukos Oil Company
Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Determination Following Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a split order for costs should be made
- 2 Whether costs should be awarded to Yukos Oil Company and in what proportion
- 3 Appropriate treatment of costs where neither party achieved its primary aim
Ratio Decidendi
Neither party achieved its primary aim; the English proceedings achieved nothing substantive. The appropriate order is a single costs award in favour of Yukos Oil Company, subject to a 25% deduction to reflect points on which they did not succeed.
Court Disposition
Costs awarded to Yukos Oil Company at 75% of their total costs, to be assessed if not agreed, covering both first instance and appeal.
Orders
- Yukos Oil Company awarded 75% of their costs, to be assessed if not agreed, for both first instance and appeal.
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