Sugar Hut Group Ltd & Ors v AJ Insurance

Sugar Hut Group Ltd & Ors v AJ Insurance

Although the claimants were the successful party, a 30% reduction in their costs was warranted due to failure on discrete and significant issues and unreasonable pursuit of exaggerated claims. From 14 June 2014, the claimants are denied costs and the defendant is entitled to its costs due to the claimants’ unreasonable conduct after a settlement offer, except for costs relating to the assessment of interest, which remain with the claimants.

Parties
Claimant: Sugar Hut Group Ltd & others; Defendant: AJ Insurance
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Costs Judgment Following Main Judgment on Quantum
Outcome
Claimants awarded costs with a 30% reduction up to 14 June 2014; from 14 June 2014, claimants denied costs and defendant awarded costs except for costs relating to interest assessment, which remain with claimants.
Legal Topics
Costs, Business Interruption Insurance, Quantum of Damages, Offers to Settle
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Costs Business Interruption Insurance Quantum of Damages Offers to Settle

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

Parties

Sugar Hut Group Ltd & others

Claimant

AJ Insurance

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Costs Judgment Following Main Judgment on Quantum

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the general rule that costs follow the event should be departed from
  2. 2 Whether the claimants should be deprived of part of their costs due to failure on discrete issues
  3. 3 Effect of a Part 36 offer and other settlement offers on costs

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimants were the successful party, a 30% reduction in their costs was warranted due to failure on discrete and significant issues and unreasonable pursuit of exaggerated claims. From 14 June 2014, the claimants are denied costs and the defendant is entitled to its costs due to the claimants’ unreasonable conduct after a settlement offer, except for costs relating to the assessment of interest, which remain with the claimants.

Court Disposition

Claimants awarded costs with a 30% reduction up to 14 June 2014; from 14 June 2014, claimants denied costs and defendant awarded costs except for costs relating to interest assessment, which remain with claimants.

Orders

  • Claimants’ costs reduced by 30% up to 14 June 2014.
  • Claimants denied costs from 14 June 2014 except for costs relating to interest assessment.