Hincks v Sense Network Ltd (Costs)
The Claimant failed to provide evidence that an order for payment on account of costs would stifle his appeal. There was no good reason advanced against making an order for payment on account. The court therefore refused a stay of execution and ordered payment on account of 90% of the Defendant’s budgeted costs.
- Parties
- Claimant: Kevin Hincks; Defendant: Sense Network Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 17 April 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Costs Ruling After Judgment on Liability
- Outcome
- Claimant's application for stay of execution refused; order for payment on account of costs granted
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Stay of Execution, Interim Payments, Appeal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kevin Hincks
Claimant
Sense Network Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Costs Ruling After Judgment on Liability
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a stay of execution should be granted on an order for payment on account of costs pending appeal
- 2 Whether an order for payment on account of costs should be made
- 3 Quantum of payment on account of costs
Ratio Decidendi
The Claimant failed to provide evidence that an order for payment on account of costs would stifle his appeal. There was no good reason advanced against making an order for payment on account. The court therefore refused a stay of execution and ordered payment on account of 90% of the Defendant’s budgeted costs.
Court Disposition
Claimant's application for stay of execution refused; order for payment on account of costs granted
Orders
- Claimant to pay Defendant 90% of Defendant’s budgeted costs on account, being £159,108
- No stay of execution granted on the order for payment on account of costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment