header-logo header-logo

Indemnity costs

24 January 2014
Issue: 7591 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Excalibur Ventures LLC v Texas Keystone Inc and other companies [2013] EWHC 4278 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 74 (Jan)

The basic rule was that a successful party would be entitled to his costs on the standard basis. The discretion was a wide one to be determined in the light of all the circumstances of the case. To award costs against an unsuccessful party on an indemnity scale was a departure from the norm. There therefore had to be something, whether it was the conduct of the claimant or the circumstances of the case, which took the case outside the norm. It was not necessary that the claimant should be guilty of dishonesty or moral blame. Unreasonableness in the conduct of proceedings and the raising of particular allegations or in the manner of raising them might suffice. So might the pursuit of a speculative claim involving a high risk of failure, or the making of allegations of dishonesty that turned out to be misconceived, or the conduct of an extensive publicity campaign designed to drive the party

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll