Dhillon & Anor v Siddiqui & Ors [2010] EWHC 1400 (Ch) (16 June 2010)

Dhillon & Anor v Siddiqui & Ors [2010] EWHC 1400 (Ch) (16 June 2010)

The personal tax claim was discontinued as it became academic due to HMRC's decision not to pursue liability. The court exercised its discretion on costs, ordering the Advisers, Marlborough, and Charterhouse to pay the claimant's costs up to 30 April 2007 and no order as to costs thereafter, while the claimant was ordered to pay the Haines Watts defendants' costs. Reserved costs for certain hearings were set off by making no order as to costs for those hearings.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1400 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Major Dhillon; Claimant: Bachmann Trust Company Limited; Defendant: Javed Siddiqui; Defendant: Peter Ramsey; Defendant: Marlborough House Associates Limited; Defendant: Charterhouse (Accountants); Defendant: Haines Watts Limited; Defendant: Haines Watts (A Firm); Defendant: Foxborough Consulting
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (professional Negligence) / Costs Determination Following Discontinuance of Personal Tax Claim
Outcome
Personal tax claim discontinued by permission; costs orders made as specified.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Indemnity, Costs Orders, Summary Judgment, Agency, Tax Avoidance
Professional Negligence Tax Law Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Indemnity Costs Orders Summary Judgment Agency +1 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Major Dhillon

Claimant

Bachmann Trust Company Limited

Claimant

Javed Siddiqui

Defendant

Peter Ramsey

Defendant

Marlborough House Associates Limited

Defendant

Charterhouse (Accountants)

Defendant

Haines Watts Limited

Defendant

Haines Watts (A Firm)

Defendant

Foxborough Consulting

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (professional Negligence) / Costs Determination Following Discontinuance of Personal Tax Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the personal tax claim should be discontinued and on what terms as to costs
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are entitled to costs following discontinuance
  3. 3 Whether any exception to the general rule on costs should apply given the claim became academic due to HMRC's actions

Ratio Decidendi

The personal tax claim was discontinued as it became academic due to HMRC's decision not to pursue liability. The court exercised its discretion on costs, ordering the Advisers, Marlborough, and Charterhouse to pay the claimant's costs up to 30 April 2007 and no order as to costs thereafter, while the claimant was ordered to pay the Haines Watts defendants' costs. Reserved costs for certain hearings were set off by making no order as to costs for those hearings.

Court Disposition

Personal tax claim discontinued by permission; costs orders made as specified.

Orders

  • Permission granted to discontinue the personal tax claim.
  • Advisers, Marlborough, and Charterhouse to pay claimant's costs of the action (not already ordered) down to and including 30 April 2007, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.