KB-2023-004010 - [2025] EWHC 2689 (KB)
Fecha: 17-Oct-2025
Conclusions
XVII Disposal
There should be no penalty for contempt. To the extent that parts of the costs of the Contempt Application have been awarded against Mr Smith and CSM is sufficient penalty in the peculiar circumstances of this case.
There should be an order for an inquiry as to damages and there should be a CMC for further directions.
The costs of the action should be paid by MGWL to Mr Smith and CSM, but there should be a carve out of a part of the costs of the Contempt Application as set out in more detail above. There should also be certain items where there are no order as to costs as set out in more detail above.
An order should be prepared to reflect these conclusions. The Court wishes to thank all Counsel for their written and oral submissions which have assisted the Court.
- Heading
- MR JUSTICE FREEDMAN
- II Background
- III The facts
- IV Penalty for contempt
- V Cross undertaking as to damages: the evidence
- VI The law relating to an application for enforcement of a cross-undertaking as to damages
- VII The law relating to applications for fortification of injunctions
- VIII Discussion: causation points
- IX Discussion: discretion points
- X Disposal of application for inquiry as to damages
- XI Costs
- XII MGWL’s submission as to costs
- XIII Submission as to costs of Mr Smith and CSM
- XIV Discussion about the incidence of costs
- XV Should the orders made by Ellenbogen J and Morris J stand despite the abandonment of the action?
- XVI The reserved costs in respect of the Contempt Application
- Conclusions