Phaestos Ltd & Anor v Ho (Costs) [2012] EWHC 763 (TCC) (22 March 2012)

Phaestos Ltd & Anor v Ho (Costs) [2012] EWHC 763 (TCC) (22 March 2012)

The claimants are not entitled to indemnity costs as the defendants' conduct was not out of the norm; standard costs are appropriate. The claimants' costs bill is too large and insufficiently detailed for summary assessment, so only an interim payment is ordered. The defendants are entitled to costs for successful...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 763 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: PHAESTOS LIMITED; Claimant: MINDIMAXNOX LLP; Claimant: IKOS CIF LIMITED; Defendant: PETER HO; Defendant: TOBIN MAXWELL GOVER
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Costs Judgment Following Summary Judgment/strike Out Application / Post Summary Judgment, Costs Assessment
Outcome
Claimants' application for indemnity costs refused; standard costs ordered. Interim payment of £40,000 to claimants. Defendants awarded £61,600 for strike-out application and £37,900 for security for costs application, payable within 14 days.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Standard Costs, Summary Assessment, Strike Out Applications, Equity Share Claims, Profit Share Claims
Civil Procedure Employment Law Company Law Indemnity Costs Standard Costs Summary Assessment Strike Out Applications Equity Share Claims +1 more

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PHAESTOS LIMITED

Claimant

MINDIMAXNOX LLP

Claimant

IKOS CIF LIMITED

Claimant

PETER HO

Defendant

TOBIN MAXWELL GOVER

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Judgment Following Summary Judgment/strike Out Application / Post Summary Judgment, Costs Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded to claimants following defendants' withdrawal of equity share claims
  2. 2 Appropriateness of summary assessment of costs claimed by both parties
  3. 3 Proper quantum of costs to be awarded on a standard basis

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants are not entitled to indemnity costs as the defendants' conduct was not out of the norm; standard costs are appropriate. The claimants' costs bill is too large and insufficiently detailed for summary assessment, so only an interim payment is ordered. The defendants are entitled to costs for successful strike-out and security for costs applications, subject to reductions for proportionality and reasonableness.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application for indemnity costs refused; standard costs ordered. Interim payment of £40,000 to claimants. Defendants awarded £61,600 for strike-out application and £37,900 for security for costs application, payable within 14 days.

Orders

  • Claimants to receive interim payment of £40,000 on account of costs, subject to detailed assessment.
  • Defendants to receive £61,600 for strike-out application costs, payable within 14 days.