Ahmad v Ouajjou & Anor

Ahmad v Ouajjou & Anor

The defendants failed to provide detailed, cogent evidence of impecuniosity or inability to pay, and there are assets available to satisfy the costs order. The administrative decree relied upon is not substantiated and was not raised at earlier stages. There is no stay of the costs order, and the appeal does not justify non-compliance. The court must enforce compliance with costs orders to uphold the policy of discouraging irresponsible litigation conduct. An unless order is appropriate, giving the defendants until 28 August 2024 to pay the £113,000 costs, failing which their defence and counterclaim will be struck out.

Parties
Claimant: Ahmad; Defendant: Ouajjou; Defendant: Anor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Application for Unless Order Following Non Payment of Costs
Outcome
Unless order granted
Legal Topics
Unless Orders, Costs Enforcement, Summary Assessment of Costs, Damages Based Agreements, Freezing Orders, Contempt of Court
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Unless Orders Costs Enforcement Summary Assessment of Costs Damages Based Agreements Freezing Orders Contempt of Court

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 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmad

Claimant

Ouajjou

Defendant

Anor

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Application for Unless Order Following Non Payment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unless order should be made striking out the defence and counterclaim unless costs are paid
  2. 2 Whether the defendants have provided sufficient evidence of impecuniosity or inability to pay
  3. 3 Whether the existence of a Spanish administrative decree or pending appeal justifies delay or non-payment

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to provide detailed, cogent evidence of impecuniosity or inability to pay, and there are assets available to satisfy the costs order. The administrative decree relied upon is not substantiated and was not raised at earlier stages. There is no stay of the costs order, and the appeal does not justify non-compliance. The court must enforce compliance with costs orders to uphold the policy of discouraging irresponsible litigation conduct. An unless order is appropriate, giving the defendants until 28 August 2024 to pay the £113,000 costs, failing which their defence and counterclaim will be struck out.

Court Disposition

Unless order granted

Orders

  • Defendants to pay £113,000 costs by 28 August 2024, failing which their defence and counterclaim will be struck out and judgment entered for the claimant.
  • Summary assessment of costs to be conducted on paper with directions for evidence and submissions as specified by the court.