AB v Michelle Spicer

AB v Michelle Spicer

The Claimant is entitled to costs assessed on the indemnity basis, but only at the National 1 Guideline Hourly Rates due to lack of justification for higher rates. Certain time entries were reduced where found unreasonable, but most items were allowed as claimed or with minor adjustments.

Parties
Claimant: AB; Defendant: Michelle Spicer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Contempt/costs Assessment / Costs Assessment Following Committal Application
Outcome
Costs assessed and allowed in the sum of £34,454.56 inclusive of VAT.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Costs Assessment, Indemnity Costs
Civil Procedure Committal for Contempt Costs Assessment Indemnity Costs

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

AB

Claimant

Michelle Spicer

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contempt/costs Assessment / Costs Assessment Following Committal Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What costs are reasonably recoverable by the Claimant on an indemnity basis following a successful committal application for contempt of court?

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant is entitled to costs assessed on the indemnity basis, but only at the National 1 Guideline Hourly Rates due to lack of justification for higher rates. Certain time entries were reduced where found unreasonable, but most items were allowed as claimed or with minor adjustments.

Court Disposition

Costs assessed and allowed in the sum of £34,454.56 inclusive of VAT.

Orders

  • The Defendant shall pay the Claimant’s costs assessed at £34,454.56.