the Applications
’): an application for summary judgment by the Claimants and a strike out and security for costs application by the Defendants. The Claimants succeeded in part in their summary judgment application. 2.The Claimants’ application was under CPR 24.2(a)(ii) for judgment on the pleaded issues of substance, ownership and infringement by the Sixth and Seventh Defendants in respect of eight Assigned Works and five New Works (as defined in the Particulars of Claim). The application succeeded only in respect of the New Works. The Defendants’ applications were both dismissed. 3.The parties have not been able to agree costs. I received sequential submissions in writing from Ms Wickenden for the Claimants and Mr Rodger for the Defendants. I have dealt with the application on paper without a further hearing in accordance with CPR 63.25(3).4.The Claimants seek the following costs orders:a.Their costs of the part of the claim which has been summarily determined – i.e. substance, ownership and infringement of the New Works (the “