![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions >> Orexim Trading Ltd v Mahavir Port And Terminal Private Ltd (Costs) [2019] EWHC 2338 (Comm) (04 September 2019) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2019/2338.html Cite as: [2019] EWHC 2338 (Comm), [2019] Costs LR 1539 |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable PDF version]
[Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
COMMERCIAL COURT
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
(Sitting as a Judge of the High Court)
____________________
OREXIM TRADING LIMITED |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
MAHAVIR PORT AND TERMINAL PRIVATE LIMITED (formerly known as FOURCEE PORT AND TERMINAL PRIVATE LIMITED) |
Defendant |
____________________
The Defendant did not appear and was not represented
Hearing dates: 28 June 2019
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Christopher Hancock QC :
Introduction
Interest
Costs
"25. I reject Mr Mansfield's submission on the materiality of the costsbudget
figure. In my view, the first defendant's approved costs
budget
is the appropriate starting point for the calculation of any interim payment on account of costs. CPR 3.18 makes plain that, where there is an approved or agreed costs
budget,
when costs are assessed on a standard basis at the end of the case, "the court will…not depart from such approved or agreed
budget
unless satisfied that there is good reason to do so." The significance of this rule cannot be understated. It means that, when costs are assessed, the costs judge will start with the figure in the approved costs
budget.
If there is no good reason to depart from that figure, he or she is likely to conclude the assessment at the same figure: see Silvia Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 19…
28. Accordingly I take, as my starting point for the calculation of the interim payment, the approved costsbudget
figure of £570,000. I make a reduction of 10% (£57,000) which I regard as the maximum deduction that is appropriate in a case where there is an approved costs
budget. I add back £15,000 to reflect the interest on costs which I have awarded. That produces a figure of £528,000."
Costs of the application