Citation: [2021] EWHC 2606 (TCC)
Summary of facts
This was a costs decision following the judgment in Croda Europe Ltd v Optimus Services Ltd [2021] EWHC 332 (TCC) (19 February 2021) in respect of an application on the part of the Claimant to enforce an adjudication decision issued on 28 July 2020 which ordered the Defendant to pay the Claimant £343,513.20 plus VAT. Roger ter Haar QC held in February 2021 that the Claimant was entitled to judgment enforcing that decision. He left it to the parties to agree the form of order: they were unable to do so, and the matter was brought back to him.
Costs issues
Whether the Claimant was entitled an order for judgment to be entered in the sum of £343,513.20 plus interest- The Defendant resisted any such order on the basis that a sum as much as that amount had already been paid or credited to the Claimant. The Court was not convinced by the Defendant’s argument; it held that the judgment in February was based upon the evidence before the Court at the time. The matters raised by the Defendant were not raised then by way of defence to the claim for enforcement. Accordingly, the Claimant was entitled to an order in the terms of the draft order.
Claimant’s application for its costs of the action-The Claimant having succeeded, the Court found no grounds for refusing the Claimant the natural order which follows.
Summary assessment of costs-The Claimant sought costs of the action and the substantive hearing in the sum of £45,078, and further costs since judgment of £11,862.50. The Defendant submitted that those costs were excessive, citing the decision of Akenhead J in Allied P&L Limited v Paradigm Housing Group Ltd [2009] EWHC 2890 (TCC). The Court found that decision to be of limited assistance and stated that the amounts claimed by way of costs were not out of line with the costs commonly incurred for adjudication enforcement actions. Further, the appropriate basis for assessment was the indemnity basis. The Claimant was entitled to its costs but the sum of £45,078 was reduced to £42,578 to reflect the amount of solicitor time involved.
Full judgment available at: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2021/2606.html
Emma Healiss was instructed for the Defendant.
