The claimants had pursued compensation over many years from the defendants alleging various kinds of misfeasance in regulating the bank BCCI. The action had collapsed.
Held: ‘this was extraordinary litigation which came to an abrupt albeit long overdue conclusion’ when the creditors called on the liquidators to abandon the action. The parties now disputed the basis for the costs order. ‘The pursuit of such hopeless but widely publicised allegations of dishonesty against so many officers of this country’s central bank of itself takes the case out of the norm. ‘ Costs were awarded on an indemnity basis.
Tomlinson J
[2006] EWHC 816 (Comm), [2006] 5 Costs LR 714
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Petrotrade Inc v Texaco Ltd CA 23-May-2000
Where a defendant failed to beat a claimant’s part 36 offer to settle, but judgment was given summarily the rule did not mean that the defendant was necessarily to be ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis, and to pay interest. Summary judgment . .
Cited – Excelsior Commercial and Industrial Holdings Ltd v Salisbury Hammer Aspden and Johnson (A Firm) CA 12-Jun-2002
The court was asked as to when it is appropriate to order costs on an indemnity basis. Waller LJ said: ‘The question will always be: is there something in the conduct of the action or the circumstances of the case which takes the case out of the . .
Cited – National Coal Board v Ridgeway CA 1987
‘action’ in section 23(1) of the 1978 Act included an omission. . .
Cited – King v Telegraph Group Ltd CA 18-May-2004
The defendant appealed against interim costs orders made in the claim against it for defamation.
Held: The general power of cost capping measures available to courts were available also in defamation proceedings. The claimant was being . .
Cited – Jordan Grand Prix Limited v Vodafone Group Plc ComC 4-Aug-2003
The claimant asserted that the defendant had agreed in the course of a telephone conversation, to provide sponsorship, and sought to enforce that agreement. There were considerable conflicts of evidence.
Held: Evidence given on behalf of the . .
Cited – Cepheus Shipping Corporation v Guardian Royal Exchange Plc 1995
. .
Cited – IPC Media Ltd v Highbury Leisure Publishing Ltd ChD 2005
. .
Cited – Cambridge Antibody Technology v Abbott Biotechnology Ltd and Another 2005
. .
Cited – Amoco (UK) Exploration Company and others v British American Offshore Ltd ComC 12-Dec-2000
. .
Cited by:
Cited – Chantrey Vellacott v The Convergence Group Plc and others ChD 31-Jul-2007
The claimants, a firm of accountants, sued their former clients for unpaid fees. The defendant company counterclaimed for professional negligence. The claimant had expended andpound;5.6m in costs. The claimants now sought a non-party costs order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Banking, Torts – Other, Costs
Updated: 16 December 2021; Ref: scu.240372