Citation: [2016] EWHC 3485 (QB)
The Court handed down its main judgment at [2016] EWHC 2511 (TCC).
The Claimants applied for costs on the indemnity basis, to be subject to detailed assessment, with payment on account.
The Court held that “the point being taken by the defendants on the application was thoroughly bad” and “as close to being unarguable as one is likely to get”.
The Court found that the First Defendant had stored up its purported defence and sprung a trap on the Claimants. It was “not within the norm to act in such a way that continues to acknowledge the validity of the proceedings whilst storing up for a few weeks later the contrary suggestion”. The First Defendant’s conduct included a “significant level of unreasonableness or otherwise inappropriate conduct”.
The Court found the Second Defendant’s conduct to be different from the First Defendant’s, in that the Second Defendant “jumped on the bandwagon” and followed the First Defendant.
The Court ordered costs to be assessed against the First Defendant on the indemnity basis, to be subject to detailed assessment and with payment on account.
Tom Owen appeared for the Claimants.
Krista Lee appeared for the First Defendant.
