Dufoo v Tolaini & Ors

Dufoo v Tolaini & Ors

The judge erred in treating the settlement agreement as a sufficient reason to exempt Mr Pannell and DAP from contributing to the costs payable by Mr Dufoo to Mr Tolaini for the period when all three applicants advanced the same unsuccessful case. The case is remitted to the trial judge to assess the appropriate contribution in accordance with the guidance given.

Parties
Appellant: Alun Dufoo; First Respondent: Jean-Paul Tolaini; Second Respondent: DA Phillips & Co Ltd (as trustee of the Premier Trust); Third Respondent: John Pannell; Fourth Respondent: Quiet Moments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; case remitted to trial judge for assessment of contribution to costs.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Multi Party Litigation, Settlement Agreements, Contribution to Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Costs Orders Multi Party Litigation Settlement Agreements Contribution to Costs

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

Parties

Alun Dufoo

Appellant

Jean-Paul Tolaini

First Respondent

DA Phillips & Co Ltd (as trustee of the Premier Trust)

Second Respondent

John Pannell

Third Respondent

Quiet Moments Limited

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in failing to order the settling parties to contribute to costs payable by the losing party
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in making no order for costs on the loan terms issue

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in treating the settlement agreement as a sufficient reason to exempt Mr Pannell and DAP from contributing to the costs payable by Mr Dufoo to Mr Tolaini for the period when all three applicants advanced the same unsuccessful case. The case is remitted to the trial judge to assess the appropriate contribution in accordance with the guidance given.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; case remitted to trial judge for assessment of contribution to costs.

Orders

  • Remit to the trial judge to re-decide Mr Dufoo’s claim for a contribution by Mr Pannell and DAP towards his costs liability to Mr Tolaini for the period when all three were advancing the same unsuccessful case.
  • No order for costs on the loan terms issue; each party to bear its own costs of that issue.