Suzui v Suzui (Re Come On Ltd, Manfuku London Ltd, Cocoro Restaurant Ltd - Companies Act 2006) [2024] EWHC 457 (Ch) (08 March 2024)

Suzui v Suzui (Re Come On Ltd, Manfuku London Ltd, Cocoro Restaurant Ltd - Companies Act 2006) [2024] EWHC 457 (Ch) (08 March 2024)

The Claimant was entitled to the documents as a director, made reasonable requests, and only received full compliance after issuing proceedings. The Defendant's allegations of misconduct were disputed and could not be resolved without cross-examination. Therefore, costs should follow the event and be awarded to the Claimant on the standard basis.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 457 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Hideko Suzui; Defendant: Kayoko Suzui
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs Following Claim for Inspection of Company Documents / Post Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Claimant awarded costs on the standard basis; costs to be assessed unless agreed.
Legal Topics
Directors' Rights to Company Documents, Costs Orders, Section 388 Companies Act 2006, Disclosure Obligations
Company Law Civil Procedure Directors' Rights to Company Documents Costs Orders Section 388 Companies Act 2006 Disclosure Obligations

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

Parties

Hideko Suzui

Claimant

Kayoko Suzui

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Costs Following Claim for Inspection of Company Documents / Post Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant was entitled to costs after the Defendant provided documents only after proceedings were issued
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's allegations of misconduct by the Claimant should affect the costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant was entitled to the documents as a director, made reasonable requests, and only received full compliance after issuing proceedings. The Defendant's allegations of misconduct were disputed and could not be resolved without cross-examination. Therefore, costs should follow the event and be awarded to the Claimant on the standard basis.

Court Disposition

Claimant awarded costs on the standard basis; costs to be assessed unless agreed.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Claimant's costs of the claim on the standard basis, subject to detailed assessment unless agreed.
  • Indicative order that Claimant is entitled to costs of the costs hearing, subject to further submissions at hand down.