Klotho Brands Limited v Kevin-Gerald Stanford

Klotho Brands Limited v Kevin-Gerald Stanford

There is no procedural or substantive requirement for a witness statement to be verified under oath for costs enforcement in Part 8 claims; the defendant's application for a stay and restriction is dismissed as meritless.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Klotho Brands Limited (formerly known as Lion/Heaven UK II Limited); Defendant/applicant: Kevin-Gerald Stanford (formerly known as Kevin Gerald Stanford)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Application / Post Judgment Costs Enforcement
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Enforcement, Verification of Witness Statements, Part 8 Procedure, CPR Compliance
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Costs Enforcement Verification of Witness Statements Part 8 Procedure CPR Compliance

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Klotho Brands Limited (formerly known as Lion/Heaven UK II Limited)

Claimant/respondent

Kevin-Gerald Stanford (formerly known as Kevin Gerald Stanford)

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Application / Post Judgment Costs Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether enforcement of a costs order should be stayed pending verification of a witness statement under oath
  2. 2 Whether reliance on a witness statement should be restricted unless verified under oath

Ratio Decidendi

There is no procedural or substantive requirement for a witness statement to be verified under oath for costs enforcement in Part 8 claims; the defendant's application for a stay and restriction is dismissed as meritless.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • No stay of costs order granted
  • No restriction on reliance on witness statement granted