Group M UK Ltd v Cabinet Office [2014] EWHC 3863 (TCC) (20 November 2014)

Group M UK Ltd v Cabinet Office [2014] EWHC 3863 (TCC) (20 November 2014)

Carat, as an interested party with a significant commercial interest and meaningful contribution, is entitled to its reasonable costs, subject to reductions for late submission, duplication, and excess, as the breach of the Practice Direction was not sufficiently serious to justify total disallowance.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 3863 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Group M UK Limited; Defendant: Cabinet Office; Interested Party: Carat (division of Dentsu Aegis Network Ltd)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Public Procurement Costs Application / Post Judgment, Summary Assessment of Costs
Outcome
Costs summarily assessed in favour of Carat against Group M.
Legal Topics
Costs, Summary Assessment, Interested Party Costs, Practice Direction Compliance
Public Procurement Civil Procedure Costs Summary Assessment Interested Party Costs Practice Direction Compliance

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Group M UK Limited

Claimant

Cabinet Office

Defendant

Carat (division of Dentsu Aegis Network Ltd)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Public Procurement Costs Application / Post Judgment, Summary Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interested party (Carat) is entitled to its costs in supporting the successful party's application
  2. 2 Whether late submission of a statement of costs by Carat should result in disallowance or reduction of costs
  3. 3 What is a reasonable and proportionate amount for Carat's costs given its role

Ratio Decidendi

Carat, as an interested party with a significant commercial interest and meaningful contribution, is entitled to its reasonable costs, subject to reductions for late submission, duplication, and excess, as the breach of the Practice Direction was not sufficiently serious to justify total disallowance.

Court Disposition

Costs summarily assessed in favour of Carat against Group M.

Orders

  • Group M to pay Carat £40,127.50 within 14 days of judgment.