WOL (London) LLP v Croydon Investments Limited & Ors (Costs)

WOL (London) LLP v Croydon Investments Limited & Ors (Costs)

The First Defendant's application substantially failed except for the need for the Claimant to re-amend its pleading; thus, the First Defendant must pay 90% of the Claimant's costs, subject to detailed assessment, and pay the Third Defendant's costs as its attendance was reasonable and it had an active interest in the outcome.

Parties
Claimant: WOL (London) LLP; First Defendant: Croydon Investments Limited; Second Defendant: RGB P&C Limited (In Liquidation); Third Defendant: Stroma Building Control Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs Judgment / Post Interlocutory Application, Costs Determination
Outcome
Application to re-amend granted; costs orders made against First Defendant in favour of Claimant and Third Defendant.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Summary Judgment, Costs Assessment, Pleading Amendment
Civil Procedure Costs Strike Out Application Summary Judgment Costs Assessment Pleading Amendment

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WOL (London) LLP

Claimant

Croydon Investments Limited

First Defendant

RGB P&C Limited (In Liquidation)

Second Defendant

Stroma Building Control Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Costs Judgment / Post Interlocutory Application, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant permission to re-amend the Particulars of Claim
  2. 2 Determination of costs between Claimant and First Defendant
  3. 3 Determination of costs between First and Third Defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant's application substantially failed except for the need for the Claimant to re-amend its pleading; thus, the First Defendant must pay 90% of the Claimant's costs, subject to detailed assessment, and pay the Third Defendant's costs as its attendance was reasonable and it had an active interest in the outcome.

Court Disposition

Application to re-amend granted; costs orders made against First Defendant in favour of Claimant and Third Defendant.

Orders

  • Permission granted to Claimant to file re-amended Particulars of Claim; reservice dispensed with.
  • First Defendant to pay 90% of Claimant’s costs of the application, subject to detailed assessment on the standard basis if not agreed.