Dr Vanessa Hill v Touchlight Genetics Limited & Ors

Dr Vanessa Hill v Touchlight Genetics Limited & Ors

The defendants are entitled to their full costs of the application to amend, on the standard basis, as the claimant withdrew her application after a contested hearing, causing the defendants to incur costs. The conduct of the claimant, while misguided and procedurally irregular, was not so unreasonable as to justify indemnity costs. A payment on account of 65% of the defendants' costs is appropriate, reflecting the likelihood of reduction on detailed assessment.

Parties
Claimant: Dr. Vanessa Hill; Defendant: Touchlight Genetics Limited; Defendant: Touchlight IP Limited; Defendant: Touchlight DNA Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Patent Entitlement Action / Consequentials Hearing on Costs After Withdrawal of Application to Amend
Outcome
Defendants awarded full costs of the application to amend on the standard basis; payment on account ordered at 65% of claimed costs; indemnity costs refused.
Legal Topics
Patent Entitlement, Costs, Amendment of Pleadings, Case Management
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Patent Entitlement Costs Amendment of Pleadings Case Management

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Vanessa Hill

Claimant

Touchlight Genetics Limited

Defendant

Touchlight IP Limited

Defendant

Touchlight DNA Services Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Entitlement Action / Consequentials Hearing on Costs After Withdrawal of Application to Amend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are entitled to their costs of the claimant's withdrawn application to amend the particulars of claim
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded on the standard or indemnity basis
  3. 3 Whether a payment on account of costs should be ordered and at what percentage

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants are entitled to their full costs of the application to amend, on the standard basis, as the claimant withdrew her application after a contested hearing, causing the defendants to incur costs. The conduct of the claimant, while misguided and procedurally irregular, was not so unreasonable as to justify indemnity costs. A payment on account of 65% of the defendants' costs is appropriate, reflecting the likelihood of reduction on detailed assessment.

Court Disposition

Defendants awarded full costs of the application to amend on the standard basis; payment on account ordered at 65% of claimed costs; indemnity costs refused.

Orders

  • Defendants to have their full costs of the application to amend, to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed.
  • Claimant to pay a sum on account of costs, set at 65% of the defendants' total costs of £395,579.52.