1998/204 - Eves and Eves v Hambros Bank (Jersey) Limited [1998] UR 204 (15 October 1998)

1998/204 - Eves and Eves v Hambros Bank (Jersey) Limited [1998] UR 204 (15 October 1998)

The action is stayed as against both plaintiffs pending payment of taxed costs from actions 97/238 and 97/260, as the claims overlap, the plaintiffs' conduct is vexatious, and the principles in Re Payne and Order 21, Rule 5(1) apply. The linkage between the plaintiffs justifies extending the stay to both, despite costs orders being only against the first plaintiff.

Citation
[1998] UR 204
Parties
Plaintiff: Mr Eves; Plaintiff: Mrs Eves; Defendant: Defendant (Bank)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
15 October 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Payment of Costs
Outcome
Action stayed as against both plaintiffs pending payment of specified costs; application to strike out action if costs not paid within seven days refused.
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Security for Costs, Vexatious Litigation, Res Judicata
Civil Procedure Banking Law Stay of Proceedings Security for Costs Vexatious Litigation Res Judicata

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Eves

Plaintiff

Mrs Eves

Plaintiff

Defendant (Bank)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Payment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the action should be stayed until plaintiffs pay costs from previous actions
  2. 2 Whether the stay should apply to both plaintiffs when costs orders were only against the first plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs' conduct is vexatious and justifies a stay

Ratio Decidendi

The action is stayed as against both plaintiffs pending payment of taxed costs from actions 97/238 and 97/260, as the claims overlap, the plaintiffs' conduct is vexatious, and the principles in Re Payne and Order 21, Rule 5(1) apply. The linkage between the plaintiffs justifies extending the stay to both, despite costs orders being only against the first plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Action stayed as against both plaintiffs pending payment of specified costs; application to strike out action if costs not paid within seven days refused.

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings as against both plaintiffs until payment of £728.00 and £918.33 in taxed costs from actions 97/238 and 97/260.
  • Refusal to strike out action if costs not paid within seven days.