Genius Sports Technologies Ltd & Ors v Soft Construct (Malta) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 2308 (Ch) (27 July 2022)

Genius Sports Technologies Ltd & Ors v Soft Construct (Malta) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 2308 (Ch) (27 July 2022)

Given the extraordinary and unjustified projected costs, the mismatch between parties' budgets, and the inadequacy of budgeting or detailed assessment alone to control costs, a costs cap of £5 million per side for future costs is necessary and proportionate. There is no compelling reason to join representative defendants to the counterclaim where neither the counterclaimant nor those defendants seek it.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2308 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Genius Sports Technologies Limited (previously known as Genius Sports Limited); Claimant: Betgenius Limited; Claimant: Genius Sports Services Limited; Claimant: Genius Sports ANZ Pty Limited; Claimant: Genius Sports Media Inc; Claimant: Genius Sports EOOD; Claimant: Genius Sports Services Eesti OU; Claimant: Genius Sports Services Colombia SAS; Claimant: Genius Sports Network ApS; Claimant: Genius Sports Danmark ApS; Claimant: Data Project SRL; Claimant: Genius Sports LT; Claimant: Genius Sports Asia Pte Limited; Claimant: Genius Sports CH SARL; Claimant: Genius Sports Group Limited; Defendant: Soft Construct (Malta) Limited; Defendant: Royal Panda Limited; Defendant: Vivaro Limited; Defendant: Soft Construct CJSC; Defendant: Soft Construct Ukraine LLC; Defendant: Soft Construct Limited; Defendant: Basketligaen; Defendant: IMG Data Limited; Defendant: Football Dataco Limited; Defendant: Liga Super Basketball; Defendant: Bosnia and Herzegovina Football Federation; Defendant: Federatia Româna de Volei
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Case Management Conference in Multi Party Intellectual Property and Competition Litigation / Costs Management and Joinder Applications Pre Trial
Outcome
Costs capping order imposed; no joinder of representative defendants to counterclaim; directions for future conduct of proceedings.
Legal Topics
Costs Management, Costs Capping Orders, Joinder of Parties, Case Management, Disclosure, Litigation Budgeting

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Genius Sports Technologies Limited (previously known as Genius Sports Limited)

Claimant

Betgenius Limited

Claimant

Genius Sports Services Limited

Claimant

Genius Sports ANZ Pty Limited

Claimant

Genius Sports Media Inc

Claimant

Genius Sports EOOD

Claimant

Genius Sports Services Eesti OU

Claimant

Genius Sports Services Colombia SAS

Claimant

Genius Sports Network ApS

Claimant

Genius Sports Danmark ApS

Claimant

Data Project SRL

Claimant

Genius Sports LT

Claimant

Genius Sports Asia Pte Limited

Claimant

Genius Sports CH SARL

Claimant

Genius Sports Group Limited

Claimant

Soft Construct (Malta) Limited

Defendant

Royal Panda Limited

Defendant

Vivaro Limited

Defendant

Soft Construct CJSC

Defendant

Soft Construct Ukraine LLC

Defendant

Soft Construct Limited

Defendant

Basketligaen

Defendant

IMG Data Limited

Defendant

Football Dataco Limited

Defendant

Liga Super Basketball

Defendant

Bosnia and Herzegovina Football Federation

Defendant

Federatia Româna de Volei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Case Management Conference in Multi Party Intellectual Property and Competition Litigation / Costs Management and Joinder Applications Pre Trial

  1. 1 Whether to impose a costs capping order or costs budgeting regime in complex, high-value litigation
  2. 2 Whether to join certain representative defendants to the counterclaim

Ratio Decidendi

Given the extraordinary and unjustified projected costs, the mismatch between parties' budgets, and the inadequacy of budgeting or detailed assessment alone to control costs, a costs cap of £5 million per side for future costs is necessary and proportionate. There is no compelling reason to join representative defendants to the counterclaim where neither the counterclaimant nor those defendants seek it.

Court Disposition

Costs capping order imposed; no joinder of representative defendants to counterclaim; directions for future conduct of proceedings.

Orders

  • Each party's future costs from 28 July 2022 are capped at £5 million, excluding third party document management provider costs.
  • Costs judge may permit recovery in excess of the cap only if there is good reason and it was not reasonable to apply for variation under CPR 3.19(7).