Colour Quest Ltd & Ors v Total Downstream UK Plc & Ors (Rev 1) [2009] EWHC 823 (Comm) (22 April 2009)
Indemnity costs were justified against Total up to 23 May 2008 for unreasonable denial of negligence, but not for the foreseeability issue or for Chevron's claims of dishonesty. BP was entitled to indemnity costs from 28 June 2008 following clarification of its Part 36 offer. Shell was entitled to costs for the lost fuel claim, and WLPS/UKOP was entitled to full costs. Interest on costs was set at three months LIBOR +4% for BP, and Judgment Act interest on other costs was postponed to six months from judgment. Assessment of Chevron's costs was not postponed pending appeal.
- Citation
- [2009] EWHC 823 (Comm)
- Parties
- Claimants: Colour Quest Limited and Others; Claimants: Douglas Jessop Claimants; Claimants: West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd and United Kingdom Oil Pipelines Ltd; Claimant: BP Oil UK Limited; Claimant: Shell UK Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Total Downstream UK PLC; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Total UK Limited; Defendant/part 20 Defendant: Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited; Part 20 Defendant/third Party: Chevron Limited; Fourth Party: Total Milford Haven Refinery Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 April 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Court Post Judgment Costs Hearing / Post Judgment, Costs and Consequential Orders
- Outcome
- Indemnity costs awarded to claimants against Total up to 23 May 2008 for negligence; standard costs thereafter and on foreseeability; BP awarded indemnity costs from 28 June 2008; Shell and WLPS/UKOP awarded full costs as specified; interest on costs set as ordered; assessment of Chevron's costs not postponed.
- Legal Topics
- Indemnity Costs, Negligence, Foreseeability, Vicarious Liability, Interest on Costs, Part 36 Offers, Costs Assessment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Colour Quest Limited and Others
Claimants
Douglas Jessop Claimants
Claimants
West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd and United Kingdom Oil Pipelines Ltd
Claimants
BP Oil UK Limited
Claimant
Shell UK Limited
Claimant
Total Downstream UK PLC
Defendant/part 20 Claimant
Total UK Limited
Defendant/part 20 Claimant
Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited
Defendant/part 20 Defendant
Chevron Limited
Part 20 Defendant/third Party
Total Milford Haven Refinery Limited
Fourth Party
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Post Judgment Costs Hearing / Post Judgment, Costs and Consequential Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded against Total for unreasonable conduct in contesting negligence and foreseeability
- 2 Whether Chevron is entitled to indemnity costs for alleged dishonesty by Total
- 3 Whether BP is entitled to indemnity costs and from what date following a Part 36 offer
Ratio Decidendi
Indemnity costs were justified against Total up to 23 May 2008 for unreasonable denial of negligence, but not for the foreseeability issue or for Chevron's claims of dishonesty. BP was entitled to indemnity costs from 28 June 2008 following clarification of its Part 36 offer. Shell was entitled to costs for the lost fuel claim, and WLPS/UKOP was entitled to full costs. Interest on costs was set at three months LIBOR +4% for BP, and Judgment Act interest on other costs was postponed to six months from judgment. Assessment of Chevron's costs was not postponed pending appeal.
Court Disposition
Indemnity costs awarded to claimants against Total up to 23 May 2008 for negligence; standard costs thereafter and on foreseeability; BP awarded indemnity costs from 28 June 2008; Shell and WLPS/UKOP awarded full costs as specified; interest on costs set as ordered; assessment of Chevron's costs not postponed.
Orders
- Claimants recover indemnity costs from Total up to 23 May 2008 on negligence issue
- Claimants recover standard costs thereafter and on foreseeability issue
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