Scenna & Anor v Persons Unknown Using the Identity "Nancy Chen" & Ors (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 2173 (Ch) (30 August 2023)

Scenna & Anor v Persons Unknown Using the Identity "Nancy Chen" & Ors (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 2173 (Ch) (30 August 2023)

The Banks' costs were assessed by reference to guideline hourly rates (London 2), the reasonableness of time spent, and the necessity of work done. The court found the Banks' claimed rates and fees excessive and reduced the awards accordingly, applying indemnity basis for disclosure applications and standard basis for other matters. The Claimants' request for extended time to pay was refused as they had already had more than 35 days since the hearing.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 2173 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Daniel Carlos Scenna; Claimant: Host Growth Inc; Defendant: Persons Unknown Using the Identity 'Nancy Chen'; Defendant: Persons Unknown Using the Identity 'Vera'; Defendant: Pion Market Ltd; Defendant: QS Trading Ltd; Defendant: Win FY Pty Ltd; Defendant: Teco Industrial Pty Ltd; Defendant: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd; Defendant: Westpac Banking Corporation; Defendant: Dah Sing Bank Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment Following Substantive Judgment / Post Judgment Consequential Hearing; Summary Assessment of Costs
Outcome
Claimants ordered to pay the Seventh and Eighth Defendant Banks' costs as summarily assessed.
Legal Topics
Summary Assessment of Costs, Indemnity and Standard Basis Costs, Guideline Hourly Rates, Costs Orders, Jurisdiction Applications
Civil Procedure Banking Law Summary Assessment of Costs Indemnity and Standard Basis Costs Guideline Hourly Rates Costs Orders Jurisdiction Applications

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 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Carlos Scenna

Claimant

Host Growth Inc

Claimant

Persons Unknown Using the Identity 'Nancy Chen'

Defendant

Persons Unknown Using the Identity 'Vera'

Defendant

Pion Market Ltd

Defendant

QS Trading Ltd

Defendant

Win FY Pty Ltd

Defendant

Teco Industrial Pty Ltd

Defendant

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd

Defendant

Westpac Banking Corporation

Defendant

Dah Sing Bank Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment Following Substantive Judgment / Post Judgment Consequential Hearing; Summary Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate amount of costs to be awarded to the Seventh and Eighth Defendant Banks?
  2. 2 Should costs be assessed on the indemnity or standard basis?
  3. 3 Are the hourly rates and counsel's fees claimed reasonable?

Ratio Decidendi

The Banks' costs were assessed by reference to guideline hourly rates (London 2), the reasonableness of time spent, and the necessity of work done. The court found the Banks' claimed rates and fees excessive and reduced the awards accordingly, applying indemnity basis for disclosure applications and standard basis for other matters. The Claimants' request for extended time to pay was refused as they had already had more than 35 days since the hearing.

Court Disposition

Claimants ordered to pay the Seventh and Eighth Defendant Banks' costs as summarily assessed.

Orders

  • Claimants to pay the Seventh Defendant Bank £157,000 within 14 days of the order.
  • Claimants to pay the Eighth Defendant Bank £110,000 within 14 days of the order.