Attwood v Maidment & Ors [2012] EWHC 2353 (Ch) (16 July 2012)

Attwood v Maidment & Ors [2012] EWHC 2353 (Ch) (16 July 2012)

Mr Attwood was the successful party on both the petition and quantification; his conduct was not unreasonable; the offers to settle did not justify a significant reduction; but as he was not wholly successful, a slight discount was appropriate. The court ordered Mr Attwood to receive 90% of his costs since 22 September 2011.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 2353 (Ch)
Parties
Petitioner: Allan Attwood; Respondents: Geoffrey Maidment & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Unfair Prejudice Petition (companies Act 2006, S.994) / Post Trial Costs Determination and Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Petitioner awarded 90% of his costs since 22 September 2011; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Share Valuation, Costs Orders, Appeal Procedure
Company Law Civil Procedure Unfair Prejudice Share Valuation Costs Orders Appeal Procedure

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allan Attwood

Petitioner

Geoffrey Maidment & Ors

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Unfair Prejudice Petition (companies Act 2006, S.994) / Post Trial Costs Determination and Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner is entitled to costs incurred since 22 September 2011 and in what proportion
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the parties or offers to settle should affect the costs order
  3. 3 Whether permission to appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Attwood was the successful party on both the petition and quantification; his conduct was not unreasonable; the offers to settle did not justify a significant reduction; but as he was not wholly successful, a slight discount was appropriate. The court ordered Mr Attwood to receive 90% of his costs since 22 September 2011.

Court Disposition

Petitioner awarded 90% of his costs since 22 September 2011; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay 90% of petitioner's costs incurred since 22 September 2011.
  • Permission to appeal refused.