Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors

Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors

The court must reserve costs where Part 36 offers exist and may relate to both decided and undecided issues, as the terms of the offers cannot be disclosed until all issues are resolved; this approach is mandated by CPR 36.16 and supported by precedent.

Parties
Claimant: Interactive Technology Corporation Limited; Defendant: Jonathan Ferster; Defendant: World Online Software N.V.; Defendant: Carmel Media Group N.V.; Defendant: Data Traffic Solutions Limited; Defendant: Four Seasons Advertising Limited; Defendant: Four Seasons Media Limited; Defendant: Four Seasons Technology Limited; Defendant: Interactive Technology Corporation (Europe) Limited; Defendant: Lanesborough Investments Limited; Defendant: Lanesborough Media Limited; Defendant: Lanesborough Technology Limited; Defendant: Peaklink Limited; Defendant: Woodville Limited; Defendant: World Online Software Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Consequential Applications
Outcome
costs reserved
Legal Topics
Costs, Part 36 Offers, Shareholder Disputes, Equitable Compensation
Civil Procedure Company Law Costs Part 36 Offers Shareholder Disputes Equitable Compensation

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Interactive Technology Corporation Limited

Claimant

Jonathan Ferster

Defendant

World Online Software N.V.

Defendant

Carmel Media Group N.V.

Defendant

Data Traffic Solutions Limited

Defendant

Four Seasons Advertising Limited

Defendant

Four Seasons Media Limited

Defendant

Four Seasons Technology Limited

Defendant

Interactive Technology Corporation (Europe) Limited

Defendant

Lanesborough Investments Limited

Defendant

Lanesborough Media Limited

Defendant

Lanesborough Technology Limited

Defendant

Peaklink Limited

Defendant

Woodville Limited

Defendant

World Online Software Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Consequential Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should make an immediate costs order in favour of ITC for the Liability Issues despite the existence of unresolved Part 36 offers.
  2. 2 Effect of CPR 36.16 on disclosure and consideration of Part 36 offers before all issues are decided.
  3. 3 Whether Part 36 offers are relevant to the costs of the Liability Issues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court must reserve costs where Part 36 offers exist and may relate to both decided and undecided issues, as the terms of the offers cannot be disclosed until all issues are resolved; this approach is mandated by CPR 36.16 and supported by precedent.

Court Disposition

costs reserved

Orders

  • ITC's costs of the Liability Issues are reserved; no immediate costs order is made.