Ana Tomic & Anor v The Residences by Damoor Limited & Anor

Ana Tomic & Anor v The Residences by Damoor Limited & Anor

The claimants were entitled to costs as they were wholly successful in their application to enforce the undertaking. The second defendant's conduct in ignoring correspondence, failing to provide information, and breaching the undertaking was unreasonable and justified indemnity costs for the earlier periods. However, after the third witness statement and constructive engagement by the defendant's new legal team, costs were assessed on the standard basis for the later period. The total costs awarded were £21,000.

Parties
Claimant: Ana Tomic; Claimant: Jens-Peter Stein; Defendant: The Residences by Damoor Limited; Defendant: Anthony James Camille Cotran
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Costs Ruling Following Application to Enforce Compliance With Undertaking
Outcome
Application for costs granted in part; costs summarily assessed.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Enforcement of Undertakings, Costs Assessment, Breach of Undertaking
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Freezing Injunctions Enforcement of Undertakings Costs Assessment Breach of Undertaking

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ana Tomic

Claimant

Jens-Peter Stein

Claimant

The Residences by Damoor Limited

Defendant

Anthony James Camille Cotran

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Costs Ruling Following Application to Enforce Compliance With Undertaking

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants complied with the terms of the court undertaking regarding sale proceeds
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to costs and on what basis (indemnity or standard)
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' conduct justified indemnity costs

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants were entitled to costs as they were wholly successful in their application to enforce the undertaking. The second defendant's conduct in ignoring correspondence, failing to provide information, and breaching the undertaking was unreasonable and justified indemnity costs for the earlier periods. However, after the third witness statement and constructive engagement by the defendant's new legal team, costs were assessed on the standard basis for the later period. The total costs awarded were £21,000.

Court Disposition

Application for costs granted in part; costs summarily assessed.

Orders

  • Second defendant to pay the claimants £21,000 in costs arising from and incidental to the application.