XL CATLIN INSURANCE COMPANY UK LIMITED v LINKHAM SERVICES LIMITED & Ors

XL CATLIN INSURANCE COMPANY UK LIMITED v LINKHAM SERVICES LIMITED & Ors

The claimant was entitled to lift the stay and enter judgment for £300,000 against each of the second and third defendants due to their admitted default under the settlement agreement. Indemnity costs were not justified as the defendants' conduct did not fall outside the norm of commercial litigation; costs were awarded on the standard basis.

Parties
Claimant: XL Catlin Insurance Company UK Limited; Defendant: Linkham Services Limited; Defendant: Dominic Jirjodhan Persad; Defendant: Michael Jon Cranfield; Defendant: Richard John Gildea; Defendant: International Medical Rescue Limited; Defendant: International Travel & Healthcare Limited; Defendant: Newport Capital Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Application for Judgment Following Default Under Tomlin Order
Outcome
Judgment for claimant against second and third defendants for £300,000 each, with interest and costs on the standard basis.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Settlement Agreements, Default Judgment, Costs Assessment
Contract Law Commercial Law Enforcement of Settlement Agreements Default Judgment Costs Assessment

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XL Catlin Insurance Company UK Limited

Claimant

Linkham Services Limited

Defendant

Dominic Jirjodhan Persad

Defendant

Michael Jon Cranfield

Defendant

Richard John Gildea

Defendant

International Medical Rescue Limited

Defendant

International Travel & Healthcare Limited

Defendant

Newport Capital Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Application for Judgment Following Default Under Tomlin Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the stay on proceedings should be lifted due to default under a Tomlin order
  2. 2 Whether judgment should be entered for the claimant against the second and third defendants
  3. 3 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded or costs on the standard basis

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was entitled to lift the stay and enter judgment for £300,000 against each of the second and third defendants due to their admitted default under the settlement agreement. Indemnity costs were not justified as the defendants' conduct did not fall outside the norm of commercial litigation; costs were awarded on the standard basis.

Court Disposition

Judgment for claimant against second and third defendants for £300,000 each, with interest and costs on the standard basis.

Orders

  • Stay on proceedings lifted as against second and third defendants
  • Judgment entered for £300,000 against each of the second and third defendants