Scenic International Group Ltd v Adenaike & Ors (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 1178 (Ch) (16 May 2024)

Scenic International Group Ltd v Adenaike & Ors (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 1178 (Ch) (16 May 2024)

The claimant's failure to serve a schedule of costs in accordance with PD 44, combined with the disproportionate and unreasonable level of solicitors' costs claimed, justified a substantial reduction. The court summarily assessed recoverable costs at £23,235, reflecting what was reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1178 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Scenic International Group Limited (In Provisional Liquidation); First Defendant: Richard Adenaike; Second Defendant: Andrew Peters; Third Defendant: AIGG Holdings Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Employment Law & HR Solutions Ltd; Fifth Defendant: Joyce Ezed; Sixth Defendant: Brasaa Corporation U. K. Limited; Seventh Defendant: Sam Adenaike (also known as Samuel Adenaike, Samuel Babs Adenaike, Sammo Adenaike); Eighth Defendant: Leah Adenaike
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Interim Application for Post Judgment Freezing Orders and Costs / Costs Ruling Following Summary Assessment
Outcome
Costs summarily assessed and awarded to the claimant in the reduced amount of £23,235 against the relevant defendants.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Summary Assessment of Costs, Proportionality of Legal Costs, Guideline Hourly Rates, Practice Direction 44 Compliance
Civil Procedure Insolvency Commercial Law Freezing Orders Summary Assessment of Costs Proportionality of Legal Costs Guideline Hourly Rates Practice Direction 44 Compliance

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scenic International Group Limited (In Provisional Liquidation)

Claimant

Richard Adenaike

First Defendant

Andrew Peters

Second Defendant

AIGG Holdings Ltd

Third Defendant

Employment Law & HR Solutions Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Joyce Ezed

Fifth Defendant

Brasaa Corporation U. K. Limited

Sixth Defendant

Sam Adenaike (also known as Samuel Adenaike, Samuel Babs Adenaike, Sammo Adenaike)

Seventh Defendant

Leah Adenaike

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Application for Post Judgment Freezing Orders and Costs / Costs Ruling Following Summary Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to recover its costs for the application to continue freezing orders post-judgment
  2. 2 Whether the costs claimed are proportionate and reasonable
  3. 3 Effect of failure to serve a schedule of costs in accordance with PD 44

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's failure to serve a schedule of costs in accordance with PD 44, combined with the disproportionate and unreasonable level of solicitors' costs claimed, justified a substantial reduction. The court summarily assessed recoverable costs at £23,235, reflecting what was reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Costs summarily assessed and awarded to the claimant in the reduced amount of £23,235 against the relevant defendants.

Orders

  • Claimant to recover costs of £23,235 from the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Defendants.