Firstcity Insurance Group Ltd. & Anor v Orchard (A Firm)& Anor [2002] EWHC 1433 (QB) (11 June 2002)

Firstcity Insurance Group Ltd. & Anor v Orchard (A Firm)& Anor [2002] EWHC 1433 (QB) (11 June 2002)

Indemnity costs were ordered for the first defendant's counterclaim from 7 January 2002 as there was no injustice in doing so after a valid Part 36 offer was not accepted. Indemnity costs were refused for defending the claim as the claimants' conduct was not unreasonable or deserving of disapproval, and the case was not exceptional. A further interim payment on account of costs was refused due to insufficient detail on costs incurred.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 1433 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: FirstCity Insurance Group Ltd.; Claimant: FirstCity Insurance Brokers Ltd.; First Defendant: Orchard (sued as a firm); Second Defendant: Gee
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings (costs Applications) / Post Judgment, Costs Assessment and Related Applications
Outcome
Applications for indemnity costs for defending the claim and for a further interim payment on account of costs refused; indemnity costs granted for the counterclaim from 7 January 2002; claimants awarded today's costs against the second defendant.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Standard Basis Costs, Part 36 Offers, Interim Payments on Account of Costs, Detailed Assessment of Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Standard Basis Costs Part 36 Offers Interim Payments on Account of Costs Detailed Assessment of Costs

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FirstCity Insurance Group Ltd.

Claimant

FirstCity Insurance Brokers Ltd.

Claimant

Orchard (sued as a firm)

First Defendant

Gee

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings (costs Applications) / Post Judgment, Costs Assessment and Related Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded for the counterclaim from 7 January 2002 under CPR Part 36 Rule 21(3)
  2. 2 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded for defending the claim under CPR Part 44 Rule 4
  3. 3 Whether a further interim payment on account of costs should be ordered for the second defendant

Ratio Decidendi

Indemnity costs were ordered for the first defendant's counterclaim from 7 January 2002 as there was no injustice in doing so after a valid Part 36 offer was not accepted. Indemnity costs were refused for defending the claim as the claimants' conduct was not unreasonable or deserving of disapproval, and the case was not exceptional. A further interim payment on account of costs was refused due to insufficient detail on costs incurred.

Court Disposition

Applications for indemnity costs for defending the claim and for a further interim payment on account of costs refused; indemnity costs granted for the counterclaim from 7 January 2002; claimants awarded today's costs against the second defendant.

Orders

  • First defendant's costs of the counterclaim from 7 January 2002 to be assessed on an indemnity basis.
  • Costs of defending the claim for both defendants to be assessed on the standard basis.