Afan Valley Limited v Lupton Fawcett (a firm) & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2498 (KB)
Kew Green Group Limited & Anor v Jamerson Lamb & Ors
3 July 2023
[2023] EWHC 1628 (KB)
High Court
Two companies fought in court. The judge threw out some of one company's claims, but neither company had to pay the other's legal fees. One company has to pay for a separate, abandoned part of the case. The main case will go to trial next year.
Key Facts
- •Kew Green Group Ltd et al. (Claimants) sued Jameson Lamb et al. (Defendants) for breaches of contract, fiduciary duties, and other related claims.
- •Four of the seven defendants applied for strike out or summary judgment of parts of the claim.
- •The claims involved three different contracts, fiduciary duties, inducing breaches of contract, conspiracy, and other equitable claims.
- •Lamb and Pritchard, former senior managers and directors, used Axiom and JLAP Investments after leaving Kew Green.
- •The court found certain paragraphs of the Particulars of Claim (POC) bound to fail and suitable for strike out.
Legal Principles
A successful party should recover its costs unless it acted unreasonably or the points raised materially added to costs.
Case law cited by Mr. Nicholls (specific cases not detailed in the document)
The court has discretion to award indemnity costs where a party's conduct is unreasonable.
CPR rule 44.2(5)(b) and (c), CPR rule 44.3
A party succeeding in striking out parts of a claim is generally entitled to costs related to those struck-out parts.
No specific source cited, but implied in the judge's reasoning.
Section 170(2) of the 2006 Act (likely the Companies Act 2006) concerning post-directorship fiduciary duties was relevant but not pleaded.
Companies Act 2006 (Section 170(2))
Outcomes
Paragraphs 23.2A, the reference to "contracts of employment" in paragraph 38, and paragraphs 42, 50, 53, and 54 of the POC were struck out.
These paragraphs were considered bound to fail.
No order as to costs of the strike-out application (SO application).
The outcome was considered an "expensive score draw", with neither party clearly succeeding or failing.
First, second, third, and seventh defendants to pay claimants' costs of the disclosure application (SD application) on the standard basis.
Defendants abandoned the SD application.
No separate award for costs attributable to the struck-out allegations (SOA costs).
Costs related to the struck-out parts were not readily severable and unlikely to have materially increased overall costs.
Trial set for April 2024.
Court's initiative to manage the case efficiently.
Similar Cases
WOL (London) LLP v Croydon Investments Limited & Ors (Costs)
[2024] EWHC 485 (TCC)
RESOURCE RECOVERY SOLUTIONS (DERBYSHIRE) LIMITED v DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL & Anor.
[2022] EWHC 1209 (TCC)
Ashraful Alam Khokan v Jawad Hossain Nirjhor (Costs)
[2024] EWHC 1873 (KB)
Henderson & Jones Limited v David Jason Ross & Ors
[2023] EWHC 1585 (Ch)