Christian Mark Richard Evans v Andrew McTeare & Ors

Christian Mark Richard Evans v Andrew McTeare & Ors

The Third Respondent was entitled to its costs as the active opposing party after the appellant discontinued the appeal, having played a distinct role from the neutral Liquidators. Any issues of duplication or quantum are for assessment. Impecuniosity is not a bar to an interim payment, and the existence of related proceedings does not justify postponement of assessment or payment.

Parties
Appellant: Christian Mark Richard Evans; Respondent (joint Liquidator of Second Respondent): Andrew McTeare; Respondent (joint Liquidator of Second Respondent): Anthony Davidson; Second Respondent: PVE Capital LLP (In Liquidation); Third Respondent: PVE Capital Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal (costs) in Insolvency Proceedings / Post Settlement, Costs Determination After Discontinuance of Appeal
Outcome
Costs order in favour of the Third Respondent; detailed assessment ordered; interim payment on account ordered.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Role of Respondents/interested Parties, Duplication of Costs, Assessment of Costs, Impecuniosity and Interim Payments
Insolvency Civil Procedure Costs Costs Orders Role of Respondents/interested Parties Duplication of Costs Assessment of Costs Impecuniosity and Interim Payments

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

Parties

Christian Mark Richard Evans

Appellant

Andrew McTeare

Respondent (joint Liquidator of Second Respondent)

Anthony Davidson

Respondent (joint Liquidator of Second Respondent)

PVE Capital LLP (In Liquidation)

Second Respondent

PVE Capital Limited

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (costs) in Insolvency Proceedings / Post Settlement, Costs Determination After Discontinuance of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Third Respondent should be awarded costs after the appellant discontinued the appeal against the rejection of his proof of debt
  2. 2 Whether the Third Respondent's costs should be limited or denied due to alleged duplication with the Liquidators' costs
  3. 3 Whether costs should be assessed now or postponed until after related Part 7 proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Third Respondent was entitled to its costs as the active opposing party after the appellant discontinued the appeal, having played a distinct role from the neutral Liquidators. Any issues of duplication or quantum are for assessment. Impecuniosity is not a bar to an interim payment, and the existence of related proceedings does not justify postponement of assessment or payment.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of the Third Respondent; detailed assessment ordered; interim payment on account ordered.

Orders

  • Mr Evans to pay the Third Respondent's costs of the appeal, to be assessed if not agreed.
  • Mr Evans to pay £40,000 on account of costs within 28 days.