Tates (Agents) Ltd & Anor v Nicholas & Anor [2025] EWHC 2869 (KB) (04 November 2025)

Tates (Agents) Ltd & Anor v Nicholas & Anor [2025] EWHC 2869 (KB) (04 November 2025)

The judge erred in treating unpleaded acts (statutory demand and freezing injunction) as material findings of harassment and in making a costs order against Mr Asombang for the County Court claim where he was not a party. The damages for harassment are reduced to £15,000 and the costs order against Mr Asombang in respect of the County Court claim is set aside.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2869 (KB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Tates (Agents) Limited; Claimant/respondent: Kim Alexander Gottileb; Defendant/appellant: Caroline Nicholas; Defendant/appellant: Joesph Asombang
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Harassment, Costs Orders, Breach of Contract, Joinder of Actions, Non Party Costs, Settlement Agreements
Civil Procedure Employment Law Tort Law Harassment Costs Orders Breach of Contract Joinder of Actions Non Party Costs +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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tates (Agents) Limited

Claimant/respondent

Kim Alexander Gottileb

Claimant/respondent

Caroline Nicholas

Defendant/appellant

Joesph Asombang

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in treating unpleaded acts (statutory demand and freezing injunction) as material findings of harassment against Mr Asombang
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in making a costs order against Mr Asombang in respect of the County Court claim where he was not a party

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in treating unpleaded acts (statutory demand and freezing injunction) as material findings of harassment and in making a costs order against Mr Asombang for the County Court claim where he was not a party. The damages for harassment are reduced to £15,000 and the costs order against Mr Asombang in respect of the County Court claim is set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Damages for harassment reduced from £17,500 to £15,000 against Mr Asombang
  • Costs order against Mr Asombang in respect of the County Court claim set aside