Key Facts
- •Sportcal Global Communications Limited and Global Data PLC (Claimants) brought a claim against Michael John Laflin (Defendant).
- •Howard Kennedy LLP (HK), the Defendant's former solicitors, applied to use confidential documents from the Claimants' files in related proceedings.
- •The Claimants and HK disagreed on whether HK was permitted to use the documents under the existing court orders.
- •The application was heard by Senior Master Fontaine on 8 November 2022.
- •The Claimants incurred approximately £350,000 in costs retrieving documents taken by the Defendant.
- •The dispute centered around the interpretation of the “Relevant Orders” and the application of the Brandeaux principles.
- •The Claimants and HK subsequently reached an agreement on a confidentiality club.
Legal Principles
General rule on costs: Unsuccessful party pays the costs of the successful party.
CPR 44.2(2)
Court may make a different costs order considering all circumstances.
CPR 44.2(4)
Court expects parties to cooperate to assist the court.
CPR 31.22(1) and case law (OnePlus v Mitsubishi)
Brandeaux principles regarding solicitor's retention of client documents after ceasing representation.
Not explicitly cited, but mentioned in the judgment.
Outcomes
Claimants to pay 15% contribution to HK's costs up to the first judgment, excluding certain submissions.
Both parties shared responsibility for the costs; Claimants' conduct contributed significantly to the need for the application and the resulting costs. HK could have acted sooner to propose solutions.
Claimants to pay 100% of HK's costs for specific submissions (6-11 May 2022 and permission to appeal).
These costs were deemed solely attributable to the Claimants' actions.
No order for costs incurred after 28 June 2022.
The subsequent agreement rendered further costs unnecessary.
Claimants to pay an interim payment of £10,000.
To address the costs awarded to HK.