Southern Counties Fresh Foods Ltd, Re

Southern Counties Fresh Foods Ltd, Re

CIL was the overall successful party but failed on significant issues and exaggerated some claims. RWM should pay 50% of CIL's costs for Period 1 (up to main judgment), and 100% of CIL's costs for Periods 2 and 3 (post-main judgment), with interest on pre-19 June 2007 costs. Offers to settle, conduct regarding...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Petitioner: Cobden Investments Limited; Respondent: The RWM Purchaser Ltd; Respondent: Southern Counties Fresh Foods Limited; Respondent: Romford Wholesale Meats Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Unfair Prejudice Petition Under the Companies Act 1985 / Costs Judgment Following Main and Supplementary Judgments
Outcome
Costs apportioned: RWM to pay 50% of CIL's costs for Period 1, 100% for Periods 2 and 3, with interest on pre-19 June 2007 costs; reserved costs of RWM's application treated as Period 1 costs.
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Costs, Shareholder Disputes, Valuation of Shares
Company Law Civil Procedure Unfair Prejudice Costs Shareholder Disputes Valuation of Shares

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cobden Investments Limited

Petitioner

The RWM Purchaser Ltd

Respondent

Southern Counties Fresh Foods Limited

Respondent

Romford Wholesale Meats Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Prejudice Petition Under the Companies Act 1985 / Costs Judgment Following Main and Supplementary Judgments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How should costs be apportioned in an unfair prejudice petition with mixed success?
  2. 2 What is the effect of offers to settle and conduct of the parties on costs?
  3. 3 Should indemnity costs or interest be awarded?

Ratio Decidendi

CIL was the overall successful party but failed on significant issues and exaggerated some claims. RWM should pay 50% of CIL's costs for Period 1 (up to main judgment), and 100% of CIL's costs for Periods 2 and 3 (post-main judgment), with interest on pre-19 June 2007 costs. Offers to settle, conduct regarding mediation, and the mixed outcome justified a percentage order rather than full costs or indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned: RWM to pay 50% of CIL's costs for Period 1, 100% for Periods 2 and 3, with interest on pre-19 June 2007 costs; reserved costs of RWM's application treated as Period 1 costs.

Orders

  • RWM to pay 50% of CIL's costs for Period 1 (including reserved costs of RWM's summary judgment/strike out application).
  • RWM to pay 100% of CIL's costs for Periods 2 and 3.