Vector Investments v Williams

Vector Investments v Williams

Vector was the successful party as it recovered £750,000 plus VAT from Williams. However, due to Vector’s failure to negotiate after Williams’ offer of 29 August 2007, the unintentional exaggeration of its claim, and issues with disclosure, Vector is deprived of a substantial proportion of its costs after 19 September 2007 and must pay Williams £20,000 for wasted costs of inspection. Vector is awarded its costs up to 19 September 2007 and 50% of its costs thereafter, less £20,000, and 70% of the costs of the costs proceedings.

Parties
Claimant: Vector Investments; Defendant: J. D. Williams
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil (costs Determination After Settlement) / Post Settlement Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs order in favour of Vector, with reductions for post-offer conduct and disclosure issues.
Legal Topics
Costs, Settlement, Disclosure, Offers to Settle, Exaggeration of Claims
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Costs Settlement Disclosure Offers to Settle Exaggeration of Claims

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vector Investments

Claimant

J. D. Williams

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (costs Determination After Settlement) / Post Settlement Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which party is the successful party for the purposes of costs after settlement?
  2. 2 What is the effect of a non-Part 36 offer on costs?
  3. 3 Should conduct, exaggeration, and disclosure issues affect the costs order?

Ratio Decidendi

Vector was the successful party as it recovered £750,000 plus VAT from Williams. However, due to Vector’s failure to negotiate after Williams’ offer of 29 August 2007, the unintentional exaggeration of its claim, and issues with disclosure, Vector is deprived of a substantial proportion of its costs after 19 September 2007 and must pay Williams £20,000 for wasted costs of inspection. Vector is awarded its costs up to 19 September 2007 and 50% of its costs thereafter, less £20,000, and 70% of the costs of the costs proceedings.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of Vector, with reductions for post-offer conduct and disclosure issues.

Orders

  • Williams to pay Vector its costs up to 19 September 2007 and 50% of its costs thereafter, such costs to be assessed on a standard basis if not agreed.
  • Vector to give credit by way of reduction of the costs payable under that order for £20,000 in relation to the wasted costs incurred by Williams in inspecting Vector’s documents.