H Leverton Ltd v Crawford Offshore (Exploration) Services Ltd ((in Liquidation))
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 October 1996 |
| Date | 11 October 1996 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Queen's Bench Division
Before Mr Justice Garland
Costs - order against non-party - exceptional circumstances
Although exceptional, it was appropriate to order costs against a non-party where the non-party was a director who had the management of an action for an insolvent litigant, where the director financed the proceedings to a substantial extent and improperly caused the company to defend the claim and to prosecute a concocted counterclaim.
Mr Justice Garland so held in the Queen's Bench Division at the Central Criminal Court, ordering Christopher Richard Crawford of 22 Gypsy Lane, Nunthorpe, Middlesbrough, Cleveland, to pay a proportion of the costs incurred on an indemnity basis, by the plaintiffs, H Leverton Ltd, in their action against the defendant company, Crawford Offshore (Exploration) Services Ltd, now in liquidation.
On July 30, Mr Justice Garland gave judgment for the plaintiffs against the company in the sum of £144,085 and ruled that the identity of the defendant company's solicitors be not disclosed.
Mr Stephen Rubin for the plaintiffs; Mr Alan Green for Mr Crawford.
MR JUSTICE GARLAND said that following the judgment in the main action the plaintiffs sought orders for costs against Mr Crawford personally, although they did not put him on notice, and against the defendant's solicitors, who were put on notice, under section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, as substituted by section 4(1) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.
His Lordship had made an order for the plaintiffs' costs of the claim and counterclaim against the defendant company on an indemnity basis. That order would be worthless as the company was in liquidation.
The defendant company's solicitors, without any admission of liability had agreed to pay a substantial but confidential sum to the plaintiffs, but that sum, together with £35,000 deposited by Mr Crawford by way of security for costs, still left a shortfall of £105,000.
Mr Crawford was not a party to original action. However, he was the defendant company for all practical purposes. He was the sole decision-maker and kept the only records of the company produced on discovery and he gave evidence and was present throughout the hearing. Mr Crawford's connection with the proceedings was so close that it was inconceivable that he would suffer any injustice.
The discretion given by section 51...
To continue reading
Request your trial