Srendarjit Kaur Jassal v Sajad Ali Shah & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2214 (Ch)
Ashok Kapoor v Baltaj Johal
20 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 551 (KB)
High Court
A long legal battle over a fence ended with a dispute over who pays the legal bills. The judge initially made one side pay, but a higher court ruled he couldn't, because of a technicality in the rules about when costs can be awarded. The higher court corrected the mistake, clarifying the rules for future cases.
Key Facts
- •Appeal concerning costs in a long-running boundary dispute between the Kapoor and Johal families.
- •Original claimant, Madhu Kapoor (C1), deceased; appellant is her brother and personal representative, Ashok Kapoor (A).
- •Respondent is Baltaj Johal (R), son of original defendants.
- •Multiple court orders, non-compliance with CPR, and significant procedural complexities.
- •Appeal arises from HHJ Lethem's order of 19 May 2022 awarding costs to the respondent.
- •Appellant argues lack of jurisdiction to award costs and that the order was unreasonable.
- •Respondent argues entitlement to costs under CPR r 44.10(1)(b) and that the judge's decision was reasonable.
Legal Principles
Where a court order is silent on costs, generally no party is entitled to costs.
CPR r 44.10(1)(a)
Exception to the general rule: A party may recover costs from a fund held as trustee or personal representative.
CPR r 44.10(1)(b)
Deemed costs order for applications without notice; ability to vary such orders.
CPR r 44.10(2)(c), (3)
Court's power to award costs to respondent at permission hearing, even if attendance not ordered, if deemed just.
CPR PD 52B paragraph 8.1(d)
Court's ability to consider parties' conduct when determining costs.
CPR r 44.2(2)(b), (4)(a)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
HHJ Lethem lacked jurisdiction to award costs against the estate under CPR r 44.10, as the prior orders were silent on costs and no application to vary was made.
Paragraphs 2 and 3 of HHJ Lethem's order of 19 May 2022 set aside.
Lack of jurisdiction to award costs; failure to meet requirements of CPR r 44.10.
Paragraph 4 of HHJ Lethem's order of 19 May 2022 varied.
Costs order should be against the estate, not A personally.