Dexia Crediop S.P.A v Comune Di Prato [2017] EWHC 252 (Comm) (12 January 2017)

Dexia Crediop S.P.A v Comune Di Prato [2017] EWHC 252 (Comm) (12 January 2017)

Given the complexity of the case, the mixed success of both parties, the substantial resources expended on issues on which Prato failed, and the conduct of Prato's principal witness, the appropriate order is that each party should bear its own costs. This reflects the overall justice of the case and gives proper weight to Prato's status as the successful party while recognising the impact of its failed defences and counterclaims.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 252 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Dexia Crediop S.p.A.; Defendant: Comune di Prato
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim (costs Judgment) / Post Trial, Judgment on Primary Costs Order
Outcome
Each party to bear its own costs.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Issue Based Costs, Interest Rate Swaps, Restitution, Counterclaims, Proportionality in Costs, Conduct of Parties
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Financial Services Law Local Government Law Costs Orders Issue Based Costs Interest Rate Swaps Restitution +3 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dexia Crediop S.p.A.

Claimant

Comune di Prato

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim (costs Judgment) / Post Trial, Judgment on Primary Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate primary costs order following a complex commercial dispute with mixed success for both parties?
  2. 2 Should the court depart from the general rule that the unsuccessful party pays the successful party's costs?
  3. 3 To what extent should issue-based costs orders be made in light of the parties' conduct and the complexity of the issues?

Ratio Decidendi

Given the complexity of the case, the mixed success of both parties, the substantial resources expended on issues on which Prato failed, and the conduct of Prato's principal witness, the appropriate order is that each party should bear its own costs. This reflects the overall justice of the case and gives proper weight to Prato's status as the successful party while recognising the impact of its failed defences and counterclaims.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear its own costs.

Orders

  • Each side shall bear its own costs.