KA-2025-000012 - [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB)
Fecha: 16-Sep-2025
Discussion
Discussion
It is necessary for me to determine the two core points that were made by the Appellants, as set out at paragraph 15 above. Whilst I accept that the first limb of His Honour Judge Simpkiss’s judgment at paragraph 39 was that the application to lift the stay would be granted because matters had moved on as Mr Middleton was no longer involved in the litigation, it is clear that the learned judge made the award of costs against the Appellants primarily because of the arguments under the LSA. His Honour Judge Simpkiss did not provide written reasons for making his award of costs, nevertheless the transcript of the hearing on 17 December 2024 (after judgment had been given and the learned judge was dealing with the terms of the Order) quotes the learned judge as saying in the context of costs that the Appellants “raised this point and you lost”. The reference to “this point” was clearly to the arguments under the LSA.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Background
- The Appeal
- Submissions by the parties Was Mr Middleton entitled to conduct litigation under the supervision of Mr Ashall?
- Representations from the Law Society and Solicitors Regulation Authority
- Was the learned judge entitled to award costs against the Appellants?
- Discussion
- Was Mr Middleton entitled to conduct litigation under the supervision of Mr Ashall?
- Was the learned judge entitled to award costs against the Appellants?
- Other relief
- Conclusions