Cobussen Principal Investment Holdings Ltd v Akbar & Ors [2020] EWHC 3628 (QB) (29 December 2020)

Cobussen Principal Investment Holdings Ltd v Akbar & Ors [2020] EWHC 3628 (QB) (29 December 2020)

Mr. Akbar's conduct was dishonest and out of the norm, justifying indemnity costs. Legacy's conduct, though not dishonest, was culpable and also out of the norm, warranting indemnity costs. Mrs. Akbar's minimal involvement did not justify a costs order. Late settlement offers did not affect the costs order due to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3628 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Cobussen Principal Investment Holdings Limited; First Defendant: Ghouse Akbar; Second Defendant: Legacy Holdings Limited; Third Defendant: Mehreen Akbar
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Post Judgment Ruling (costs and Form of Order) / Post Trial, Costs and Consequential Orders
Outcome
Costs awarded to claimant against Mr. Akbar and Legacy Holdings Limited on the indemnity basis; no order for costs against Mrs. Akbar; interim payment on account of costs ordered; declaration of beneficial ownership granted.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Standard Costs, Disclosure, Beneficial Ownership, Non Party Costs, Interim Payment, Charging Order
Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Standard Costs Disclosure Beneficial Ownership Non Party Costs Interim Payment +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Cobussen Principal Investment Holdings Limited

Claimant

Ghouse Akbar

First Defendant

Legacy Holdings Limited

Second Defendant

Mehreen Akbar

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Post Judgment Ruling (costs and Form of Order) / Post Trial, Costs and Consequential Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Basis for assessment of costs (indemnity or standard) against Mr. Akbar and Legacy Holdings Limited
  2. 2 Effect of late settlement offers on costs
  3. 3 Whether costs should be ordered against Mrs. Akbar

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Akbar's conduct was dishonest and out of the norm, justifying indemnity costs. Legacy's conduct, though not dishonest, was culpable and also out of the norm, warranting indemnity costs. Mrs. Akbar's minimal involvement did not justify a costs order. Late settlement offers did not affect the costs order due to their timing and lack of clarity.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to claimant against Mr. Akbar and Legacy Holdings Limited on the indemnity basis; no order for costs against Mrs. Akbar; interim payment on account of costs ordered; declaration of beneficial ownership granted.

Orders

  • Claimant awarded indemnity costs against Mr. Akbar and Legacy Holdings Limited.
  • Mr. Akbar and Legacy Holdings Limited to make interim payment on account of costs of £175,000 by 31 January 2021.