Mayhew and Holmes -v- Bois Bois and Young [2016] JRC 024 (26 January 2016)

Mayhew and Holmes -v- Bois Bois and Young [2016] JRC 024 (26 January 2016)

It is appropriate to order plaintiffs to pay 50% of defendants' costs before the Master on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed, as a sanction for failure to comply with Rule 6/26(1), but the conditional amendment of pleadings upon payment of costs is unjustified if claim is not struck out. The order for payment within 28 days with liberty to apply to strike out does not infringe Article 6 ECHR as plaintiffs can argue inability to pay at any strike out application.

Citation
[2016] JRC 024
Parties
First Plaintiff: Mayhew; Second Plaintiff: Mr Holmes; First Defendant: Bois Bois; Second Defendant: Second respondent
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
26 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Appeal / Appeal From Master's Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Indemnity Costs, Extension of Time for Appeal, Case Management, Article 6 ECHR Rights
Civil Procedure Costs Strike Out Applications Indemnity Costs Extension of Time for Appeal Case Management Article 6 ECHR Rights

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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mayhew

First Plaintiff

Mr Holmes

Second Plaintiff

Bois Bois

First Defendant

Second respondent

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time and Appeal / Appeal From Master's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Master erred in ordering plaintiffs to pay indemnity costs within 28 days, with liberty for defendants to apply to strike out if unpaid
  2. 2 Whether the Master erred in awarding indemnity costs rather than standard costs
  3. 3 Whether the Master erred in making amendment of pleadings conditional on payment of costs

Ratio Decidendi

It is appropriate to order plaintiffs to pay 50% of defendants' costs before the Master on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed, as a sanction for failure to comply with Rule 6/26(1), but the conditional amendment of pleadings upon payment of costs is unjustified if claim is not struck out. The order for payment within 28 days with liberty to apply to strike out does not infringe Article 6 ECHR as plaintiffs can argue inability to pay at any strike out application.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Plaintiffs to pay 50% of defendants' costs before the Master on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed
  • Period for payment of costs varied to 28 days from date of this judgment