header-logo header-logo

25 November 2022 / Masood Ahmed , Lal Akhter
Issue: 8004 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Indemnity costs: parties behaving badly?

101295
Masood Ahmed & Lal Akhter consider the high hurdle to clear before a court will grant indemnity costs on the basis of unreasonable conduct
  • The recent decision of Evans v R&V Allgemeine Verischerung AG provides an important reminder of the approach the courts will take when considering whether to make an indemnity costs order.
  • A court will only make an indemnity costs order where the conduct of the parties was ‘out of the norm’ and each case will be determined on its own particular facts.
  • An application for indemnity costs must be supported with strong and convincing evidence which clearly demonstrates that the conduct complained of is ‘out of the norm’.

In civil litigation, costs will either be assessed on the standard basis or the indemnity basis; the default position is the standard basis. A court may, however, order costs on the indemnity basis if the circumstances of the case justify such an order being made. The effect of an indemnity costs order is to disapply

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
back-to-top-scroll