Phaestos Ltd v Ho & Ors [2012] EWHC 4063 (QB) (22 November 2012)

Phaestos Ltd v Ho & Ors [2012] EWHC 4063 (QB) (22 November 2012)

The court retains jurisdiction under CPR 36.11(5) to summarily assess costs reserved to itself, even after acceptance of a Part 36 offer, provided the assessment is consistent with the terms of the offer. The summary assessment of costs for the August hearings is not inconsistent with the settlement and is fair, expedient, and within the court's powers.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 4063 (QB)
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 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Settlement Costs Ruling
Outcome
Costs summarily assessed; claimants to pay defendants' costs as assessed.
Legal Topics
Part 36 Offers, Summary Assessment of Costs, Settlement, Disclosure, Relief From Sanctions
Civil Procedure Costs Part 36 Offers Summary Assessment of Costs Settlement Disclosure Relief From Sanctions

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phaestos Limited

Claimant

Mindimaxnox LLP

Claimant

IKOS CIF Limited

Claimant

Peter Ho

Defendant

Tobin Maxwell Gover

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Settlement Costs Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court retains jurisdiction to summarily assess costs after acceptance of a Part 36 offer when costs have been reserved to the judge
  2. 2 Whether the summary assessment of costs is consistent with the terms of the accepted Part 36 offer

Ratio Decidendi

The court retains jurisdiction under CPR 36.11(5) to summarily assess costs reserved to itself, even after acceptance of a Part 36 offer, provided the assessment is consistent with the terms of the offer. The summary assessment of costs for the August hearings is not inconsistent with the settlement and is fair, expedient, and within the court's powers.

Court Disposition

Costs summarily assessed; claimants to pay defendants' costs as assessed.

Orders

  • Claimants to pay defendants £86,000 by way of summary assessment within 14 days.