Harcus Sinclair (a firm) v Buttonwood Legal Capital Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 2974 (Ch) (09 October 2013)

Harcus Sinclair (a firm) v Buttonwood Legal Capital Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 2974 (Ch) (09 October 2013)

Rylatt Chubb was not a party to the interpleader issue and did not act outside its role as solicitor for AREF; there was no sufficient basis to make a non-party costs order under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 2974 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Harcus Sinclair (a firm); First Defendant: Buttonwood Legal Capital Limited; Second Defendant: Rylatt Chubb (a firm); Third Defendant: Alternative Real Estate Fund Limited; Fourth Defendant: Roskill Advisors (Cayman) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Interpleader Application in Civil Litigation / Post Judgment Application for Costs Against Non Party
Outcome
Application for costs against Rylatt Chubb dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Party Costs Orders, Section 51 Senior Courts Act 1981, Solicitor Liability for Costs, Interpleader Proceedings
Civil Procedure Costs Non Party Costs Orders Section 51 Senior Courts Act 1981 Solicitor Liability for Costs Interpleader Proceedings

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harcus Sinclair (a firm)

Claimant

Buttonwood Legal Capital Limited

First Defendant

Rylatt Chubb (a firm)

Second Defendant

Alternative Real Estate Fund Limited

Third Defendant

Roskill Advisors (Cayman) Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interpleader Application in Civil Litigation / Post Judgment Application for Costs Against Non Party

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a costs order should be made against Rylatt Chubb as a party or non-party under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981

Ratio Decidendi

Rylatt Chubb was not a party to the interpleader issue and did not act outside its role as solicitor for AREF; there was no sufficient basis to make a non-party costs order under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981.

Court Disposition

Application for costs against Rylatt Chubb dismissed.

Orders

  • No order as to costs against Rylatt Chubb.