Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor

Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor

KSSL is entitled to its costs as the successful party. The counter-restitution argument was raised too late and should have been pleaded and evidenced at trial. The Part 36 offer was valid and triggered the enhanced costs consequences under CPR 36.17. Mr King's conduct, including dishonesty and failure to settle, justified indemnity costs from 22 July 2019. Interest and an additional sum are awarded as per the rules. KSSL is entitled to a payment on account and payment out of court of sums held as security for costs.

Parties
Claimant: Kings Security Systems Limited; First Defendant: Anthony Douglas King; Second Defendant: Stephen John James Evans
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/fiduciary) / Judgment on Consequential Matters Following Main Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant on consequential matters. Costs and enhanced sums awarded to KSSL.
Legal Topics
Rescission of Contract, Counter Restitution, Costs Orders, Part 36 Offers, Indemnity Costs, Interest on Judgment, Security for Costs
Contract Law Employment Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Contract Counter Restitution Costs Orders Part 36 Offers Indemnity Costs +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kings Security Systems Limited

Claimant

Anthony Douglas King

First Defendant

Stephen John James Evans

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/fiduciary) / Judgment on Consequential Matters Following Main Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether counter-restitution should be determined before costs
  2. 2 Quantum of damages and interest start date
  3. 3 Entitlement to costs and basis of assessment

Ratio Decidendi

KSSL is entitled to its costs as the successful party. The counter-restitution argument was raised too late and should have been pleaded and evidenced at trial. The Part 36 offer was valid and triggered the enhanced costs consequences under CPR 36.17. Mr King's conduct, including dishonesty and failure to settle, justified indemnity costs from 22 July 2019. Interest and an additional sum are awarded as per the rules. KSSL is entitled to a payment on account and payment out of court of sums held as security for costs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant on consequential matters. Costs and enhanced sums awarded to KSSL.

Orders

  • KSSL awarded costs subject to detailed assessment: standard basis before 22 July 2019, indemnity basis thereafter.
  • Interest on judgment sum at 2% above base rate up to 21 July 2019, then 10% above base rate thereafter.