Paragon Offshore Plc, Re (Costs) [2020] EWHC 1945 (Ch) (20 July 2020)

Paragon Offshore Plc, Re (Costs) [2020] EWHC 1945 (Ch) (20 July 2020)

The respondent's opposition to the discharge application was wholly unsuccessful and lacked merit. He was repeatedly warned of potential costs consequences. There was no valid reason to adjourn the costs application or to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event. The applicants are entitled to their...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1945 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Nicholas Guy Edwards; Applicant: David Philip Soden; Applicant: Neville Barry Kahn; Respondent: Michael R. Hammersley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Insolvency Application (costs Judgment) / Post Judgment (costs Determination)
Outcome
Costs awarded against respondent; payment on account ordered; balance to be assessed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Discharge of Administrators, Standard Basis Assessment, Payment on Account
Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Costs Discharge of Administrators Standard Basis Assessment Payment on Account

Source-derived case record

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

Nicholas Guy Edwards

Applicant

David Philip Soden

Applicant

Neville Barry Kahn

Applicant

Michael R. Hammersley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Application (costs Judgment) / Post Judgment (costs Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded against the respondent following unsuccessful opposition to discharge of administrators
  2. 2 Whether to adjourn the costs application pending potential further applications by the respondent
  3. 3 Whether costs should be summarily assessed or subject to detailed assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's opposition to the discharge application was wholly unsuccessful and lacked merit. He was repeatedly warned of potential costs consequences. There was no valid reason to adjourn the costs application or to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event. The applicants are entitled to their costs from 12 March 2020, to be assessed on the standard basis, with a payment on account ordered.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded against respondent; payment on account ordered; balance to be assessed.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay applicants' costs from 12 March 2020, assessed on the standard basis.
  • Respondent to pay £116,008.14 plus VAT of £23,201.63 on account of costs.