ACLBDD Holdings Ltd & Ors v Staechelin & Ors (Costs), Court of Appeal - Chancery Division, March 06, 2018, [2018] EWHC 428 (Ch)

Issuing Organization:Chancery Division
Actores:ACLBDD Holdings Ltd & Ors v Staechelin & Ors (Costs)
Resolution Date:March 06, 2018
 
FREE EXCERPT

ACLBDD v Staechelin

Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 428 (Ch)

Case No: HC2014000468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

CHANCERY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building

Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL

Date: 06/03/2018

Before:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MORGAN

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Jonathan Cohen QC and Ashley Cukier (instructed by Grosvenor Law) for the Claimants

John Wardell QC and James McCreath (instructed by Lipman Karas LLP) for the Defendants

Written submissions following hand down of judgment

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Draft 6 March 2018 10:46 Page 3

MR JUSTICE MORGAN:

  1. On 16 January 2018, I handed down judgment in this case: see [2018] EWHC 44 (Ch). Following judgment, I heard argument on a number of consequential points and I made an order which provided that (so far as now relevant):

    1) Judgment be entered for de Pury & de Pury LLP (``the LLP'') against the Defendants for $10 million (``the Judgment Debt'');

    2) The Judgment Debt was to be bear interest at 3% above Bank of England base rate from the date on which the Judgment Debt had originally become due until the date of the judgment;

    3) The Judgment Debt together with interest as aforesaid was referred to as ``the Judgment Sum'';

    4) The Defendants were entitled to make payment of the Judgment Sum in US dollars or the sterling equivalent at the time of payment;

    5) The Defendants were to pay the LLP's costs of the action, save for certain specified costs;

    6) The Claimants were to pay the Defendants' costs of certain specified matters;

    7) The costs variously ordered were to bear interest at 3% above Bank of England base rate from specified dates.

  2. At the hearing on 16 January 2018, there was discussion as to the rate of interest payable on the Judgment Sum following judgment. The parties appeared to assume that the rate of interest would be 8% pursuant to section 17 of the Judgments Act 1838. I suggested to the parties that the matter would instead be governed by section 44A of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 as the Judgment Sum was expressed in US dollars. Both parties then wished to be allowed to make written submissions as to the rate of interest to be awarded in accordance with section 44A of the 1970 Act. I gave directions accordingly. Thereafter, I duly received submissions as to the appropriate rate of interest. This judgment deals with that issue.

  3. Before addressing the...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR FREE TRIAL