Bold v Urbisity Ltd [2010] EWHC 2530 (QB) (13 October 2010)

Bold v Urbisity Ltd [2010] EWHC 2530 (QB) (13 October 2010)

The defendant achieved only a limited measure of success on appeal, obtaining a modest reduction in liability for the claimant's costs of the assessment. The costs order should reflect this partial success, not treat the defendant as wholly successful.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2530 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Carl John Bold; Defendant: Urbisity Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Order Following Compromise of Appeal
Outcome
Defendant to pay 60% of the claimant's costs of the appeal, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Detailed Assessment, Part 36 Offers, Appeal Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Detailed Assessment Part 36 Offers Appeal Costs

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carl John Bold

Claimant

Urbisity Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Order Following Compromise of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate order for the costs of the appeal after partial success by the defendant in reducing liability for assessment costs?
  2. 2 Should the offers made by the parties affect the costs order for the appeal?

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant achieved only a limited measure of success on appeal, obtaining a modest reduction in liability for the claimant's costs of the assessment. The costs order should reflect this partial success, not treat the defendant as wholly successful.

Court Disposition

Defendant to pay 60% of the claimant's costs of the appeal, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay 60% of claimant's costs of the appeal, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.