Fieldfisher LLP v Scherbakova & Anor [2026] EWHC 104 (SCCO) (20 January 2026)

Fieldfisher LLP v Scherbakova & Anor [2026] EWHC 104 (SCCO) (20 January 2026)

The Defendants failed to provide detailed, cogent evidence of impecuniosity and did not demonstrate a material change in circumstances since the unless order. The unless order was properly imposed as a sanction for non-payment of an interim costs order, and the Defendants had ample opportunity to challenge the Claimant's fees and participate in the assessment process. Relief from sanctions is not justified.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 104 (SCCO)
Parties
Claimant: Fieldfisher LLP; First Defendant: Olga Scherbakova; Second Defendant: Alexander Scherbakov
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment Following Judgment for Unpaid Solicitor Fees / Application for Discharge of Unless Order and Relief From Sanctions
Outcome
Application dismissed; unless order stands.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Unless Orders, Interim Payments, Assessment of Solicitors' Fees, Impecuniosity, Case Management, Enforcement of Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Costs Law Contract Law Relief From Sanctions Unless Orders Interim Payments Assessment of Solicitors' Fees Impecuniosity +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fieldfisher LLP

Claimant

Olga Scherbakova

First Defendant

Alexander Scherbakov

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment Following Judgment for Unpaid Solicitor Fees / Application for Discharge of Unless Order and Relief From Sanctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unless order dated 1 September 2025 should be discharged or relief from sanctions granted
  2. 2 Whether the interim payment order should be varied or set aside
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants' impecuniosity justifies relief from sanctions

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants failed to provide detailed, cogent evidence of impecuniosity and did not demonstrate a material change in circumstances since the unless order. The unless order was properly imposed as a sanction for non-payment of an interim costs order, and the Defendants had ample opportunity to challenge the Claimant's fees and participate in the assessment process. Relief from sanctions is not justified.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; unless order stands.

Orders

  • Unless order dated 1 September 2025 remains in force.
  • Defendants' defences stand struck out if payment not made by deadline.