Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Anor v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors

Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Anor v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors

The Bank's claim, though honestly brought, was objectively weak and based on a fraudulent conspiracy by the Owner. The Bank continued to pursue the claim despite clear risks and mounting evidence undermining its case, and did so in an uncompromising manner, arguing every point and causing significant costs. These circumstances were out of the norm and justified an order for indemnity costs from May 2016, except for certain issues where standard costs were appropriate.

Parties
First Claimant: Suez Fortune Investments Ltd; Second Claimant: Piraeus Bank AE; Defendants: Talbot Underwriting Ltd and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Insurance Claim / Post Trial Costs Ruling
Outcome
The Bank is ordered to pay the Underwriters’ costs on the indemnity basis from May 2016, except for the section 41 illegality issue, the clause 4.3 issue, and the abuse of process issue, which are to be paid on the standard basis.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Wilful Misconduct, Marine Insurance, Constructive Total Loss, Costs Assessment
Insurance Law Civil Procedure Indemnity Costs Wilful Misconduct Marine Insurance Constructive Total Loss Costs Assessment

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Suez Fortune Investments Ltd

First Claimant

Piraeus Bank AE

Second Claimant

Talbot Underwriting Ltd and Others

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Commercial Insurance Claim / Post Trial Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bank should pay indemnity costs to the Underwriters from May 2016 onward
  2. 2 Whether the Bank's conduct or the character of the claim justifies indemnity costs
  3. 3 Whether any issues warrant costs on the standard basis

Ratio Decidendi

The Bank's claim, though honestly brought, was objectively weak and based on a fraudulent conspiracy by the Owner. The Bank continued to pursue the claim despite clear risks and mounting evidence undermining its case, and did so in an uncompromising manner, arguing every point and causing significant costs. These circumstances were out of the norm and justified an order for indemnity costs from May 2016, except for certain issues where standard costs were appropriate.

Court Disposition

The Bank is ordered to pay the Underwriters’ costs on the indemnity basis from May 2016, except for the section 41 illegality issue, the clause 4.3 issue, and the abuse of process issue, which are to be paid on the standard basis.

Orders

  • Bank to pay Underwriters’ costs on the indemnity basis from May 2016, except for specified issues to be paid on the standard basis.
  • Parties to agree an appropriate order including the quantum of the further sum to be paid on account of costs.