Professional Computer Group Ltd, Re

Professional Computer Group Ltd, Re

It is just in all the circumstances to order Mountain to pay the applicant's increased costs from 8 April 2008 due to Mountain's unsuccessful opposition, as Mountain's stance increased the applicant's costs, the opposition was unsuccessful, and the administration order was made in the interests of the creditors generally. There is no rule or practice immunising unsuccessful opposing creditors from adverse costs orders; the test is what is just in the circumstances.

Parties
Applicant: Professional Computer Group Ltd; Respondent: Mountain Software Holdings Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Insolvency/administration Application / Post Judgment (costs Determination)
Outcome
Applicant's costs to be an expense of the administration; Respondent to pay applicant's increased costs from 8 April 2008; Respondent's costs not an expense of the administration.
Legal Topics
Administration Order, Costs, Creditors' Rights
Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Administration Order Costs Creditors' Rights

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Professional Computer Group Ltd

Applicant

Mountain Software Holdings Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency/administration Application / Post Judgment (costs Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's costs should be an expense of the administration
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's costs should be an expense of the administration
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be ordered to pay the applicant's increased costs due to opposition

Ratio Decidendi

It is just in all the circumstances to order Mountain to pay the applicant's increased costs from 8 April 2008 due to Mountain's unsuccessful opposition, as Mountain's stance increased the applicant's costs, the opposition was unsuccessful, and the administration order was made in the interests of the creditors generally. There is no rule or practice immunising unsuccessful opposing creditors from adverse costs orders; the test is what is just in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Applicant's costs to be an expense of the administration; Respondent to pay applicant's increased costs from 8 April 2008; Respondent's costs not an expense of the administration.

Orders

  • The applicant's costs are to be an expense of the administration.
  • The respondent's application for its costs to be an expense of the administration is dismissed.