Case Nos: CL-2022-000294; CL-2022-000557; - [2025] EWHC 2529 (Comm)

Payments on Account

There were applications for payments on account of costs by Genesis, GAR Insurers and TMK 510. Taking those in turn:

As I understood it, the parties had agreed that D2-D6 should pay their shares of a payment on account of costs in the sum of US$3 million; but that while Genesis contended that the payment should be of the full sum of US$3 million, D2-D6 contended that it should be of their several shares of that sum with no ‘grossing up’ to account for TMK 510’s line. In my judgment, and in line with what I have said above as to the liability of D2 to D6 for Genesis’s costs, the payment should be of US$3 million, with the lines of D2 to D6 ‘grossed up’ to account for TMK 510’s line.

There should be a payment on account of GAR Insurers’ costs (by D2-D6 and Genesis in the proportions I have found them responsible for GAR Insurers’ costs) of 50% of 90% of the amount of £3,540,481.31 claimed by GAR Insurers.

As to TMK 510’s costs, it claims a payment on account of costs of £1,100,974.69, being 50% of the costs it says it has incurred in the Genesis action. There are real questions as to the allocation of TMK 510’s costs as between the Genesis action and the AerCap and KDAC claims; and the sum of over £2.2 million said to be the costs of one defendant referable to the Genesis action appears surprisingly high. In the circumstances I intend to order that there should be a payment on account of TMK 510’s costs of 45% of 65% of its claimed costs.