Marett -v- Marett [2014] JRC 100A (28 April 2014)

Marett -v- Marett [2014] JRC 100A (28 April 2014)

Stephen is entitled to possession as Jonathan's occupation was under a licence, not a tenancy, and the heads of agreement precluded Jonathan's claims. However, immediate possession is not realistic due to Jonathan's long occupation; one month is allowed. Indemnity costs are not justified as Jonathan's conduct, while ultimately unsuccessful, was not unreasonable or oppressive; standard costs are awarded. Concerns about mediation conduct are outweighed by Stephen's reasonable settlement offer, which Jonathan rejected.

Citation
[2014] JRC 100A
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Marett; Respondent: Jonathan Marett
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
28 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Possession and Counterclaim / Post Summary Judgment and Strike Out Application; Determination of Possession Order and Costs
Outcome
Possession order granted to Stephen; Jonathan to vacate by 12 noon, 2 May 2014; Jonathan to pay £1,000 into court on account of rent; standard costs awarded to Stephen, taxed if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Possession Proceedings, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Costs Orders, Indemnity Costs, Standard Costs, Mediation Conduct, Licence Vs Tenancy, Settlement Offers
Property Law Civil Procedure Possession Proceedings Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Costs Orders Indemnity Costs Standard Costs +3 more

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Marett

Applicant

Jonathan Marett

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Possession and Counterclaim / Post Summary Judgment and Strike Out Application; Determination of Possession Order and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate order for possession of property
  2. 2 Whether indemnity or standard costs should be awarded
  3. 3 Effect of mediation conduct on costs

Ratio Decidendi

Stephen is entitled to possession as Jonathan's occupation was under a licence, not a tenancy, and the heads of agreement precluded Jonathan's claims. However, immediate possession is not realistic due to Jonathan's long occupation; one month is allowed. Indemnity costs are not justified as Jonathan's conduct, while ultimately unsuccessful, was not unreasonable or oppressive; standard costs are awarded. Concerns about mediation conduct are outweighed by Stephen's reasonable settlement offer, which Jonathan rejected.

Court Disposition

Possession order granted to Stephen; Jonathan to vacate by 12 noon, 2 May 2014; Jonathan to pay £1,000 into court on account of rent; standard costs awarded to Stephen, taxed if not agreed.

Orders

  • Jonathan to vacate the property by 12 noon, 2 May 2014.
  • Jonathan to pay £1,000 into court on account of rent pending assessment.