AVB v TDD

AVB v TDD

The Defendant was overall more successful than the Claimant, whose provocative and unreasonable conduct gave rise to the action. The Claimant's limited success related primarily to third-party interests. Costs were allocated based on the parties' relative success, their conduct, and the effect of admissible offers.

Parties
Claimant: AVB; Defendant: TDD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Costs Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Costs apportioned between parties based on applications and periods.
Legal Topics
Costs, Conduct of Parties, Injunctions
Civil Procedure Costs Conduct of Parties Injunctions

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AVB

Claimant

TDD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Costs Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is the successful party for costs purposes?
  2. 2 What is the effect of the parties' conduct on costs?
  3. 3 What is the effect of admissible offers on costs allocation?

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was overall more successful than the Claimant, whose provocative and unreasonable conduct gave rise to the action. The Claimant's limited success related primarily to third-party interests. Costs were allocated based on the parties' relative success, their conduct, and the effect of admissible offers.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned between parties based on applications and periods.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Claimant's costs of the 24 May 2013 application.
  • No order as to costs for 24 May 2013 to 26 March 2014, except Defendant to pay Claimant's enforcement costs for November and December 2013 applications.