South Coast Investments Ltd & Ors v Axisa & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 564 (17 April 2002)

South Coast Investments Ltd & Ors v Axisa & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 564 (17 April 2002)

There is a real prospect of success on appeal because the order made after a lengthy delay did not receive proper consideration as to whether all unrecovered costs should be paid by claimants or not, and such an order may be unjust without full examination.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 564
Parties
Claimant/appellant: South Coast Investments Limited; Claimant/appellant: Michael Robert Slater; Claimant/appellant: Paul Richard Abbott; Defendant/respondent: Raymond Phillipe Axisa; Defendant/respondent: Stuart James Le Gassick; Defendant/respondent: Frederick Deakin; Defendant/respondent: Morris Merryweather Fire Protection PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Costs Assessment, Discontinuance, Winding Up, Trusts, Appeal Procedure
Civil Procedure Company Law Costs Assessment Discontinuance Winding Up Trusts Appeal Procedure

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

Parties

South Coast Investments Limited

Claimant/appellant

Michael Robert Slater

Claimant/appellant

Paul Richard Abbott

Claimant/appellant

Raymond Phillipe Axisa

Defendant/respondent

Stuart James Le Gassick

Defendant/respondent

Frederick Deakin

Defendant/respondent

Morris Merryweather Fire Protection PLC

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants should pay the whole of the defendants' costs not covered by the original order
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in amending the unsealed order to include additional costs after a lengthy delay

Ratio Decidendi

There is a real prospect of success on appeal because the order made after a lengthy delay did not receive proper consideration as to whether all unrecovered costs should be paid by claimants or not, and such an order may be unjust without full examination.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Application allowed
  • Case assigned to short warned list for hearing before two-judge court