Incat -v- Luba [2008] JRC 160 (23 September 2008)

Incat -v- Luba [2008] JRC 160 (23 September 2008)

Luba was successful on the first and third issues and is entitled to costs on those issues on the standard basis; there should be no order for costs on the second issue as both parties had partial success.

Citation
[2008] JRC 160
Parties
Applicant: Luba; Respondent: Incat group
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
23 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Costs Hearing
Outcome
costs awarded in part
Legal Topics
Costs, Implied Terms, Contract Interpretation
Civil Procedure Costs Implied Terms Contract Interpretation

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Luba

Applicant

Incat group

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Costs Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are the Incat group bound by the offer letter?
  2. 2 If so, what, if any, terms should be implied into the offer letter?
  3. 3 Was the amount of the Incat debt agreed between the parties in the e-mail exchange of April 2007?

Ratio Decidendi

Luba was successful on the first and third issues and is entitled to costs on those issues on the standard basis; there should be no order for costs on the second issue as both parties had partial success.

Court Disposition

costs awarded in part

Orders

  • Luba to have its costs on the first and third issues on the standard basis.
  • No order for costs on the second issue.