header-logo header-logo

Costs

20 March 2015
Issue: 7645 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Excalibur Ventures LLC v Texas Keystone Inc and others [2015] EWHC 566 (Comm), [2015] All ER (D) 109 (Mar)

Following an earlier judgment (see [2014] EWHC 3436 (Comm)), the Commercial Court considered, among other things, the percentage of the costs claimed that were to be awarded against the claimant, whether the rate prescribed pursuant to the Judgments Act 1838 should start any earlier than the judgment date, and the date from which interest was to be calculated. It held that interest would be payable at the rate prescribed pursuant to the 1838 Act, and that 80% of the sum claimed was a reasonable figure for an interim payment on account of costs and interest.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll