England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions >> Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Iorashi [2012] EWHC 448 (QB) (05 March 2012)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/448.html
Cite as: [2012] EWHC 448 (QB)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

		Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 448 (QB)
		Case No: HQ08X03428

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

05/03/2012

B e f o r e :

MR JUSTICE EDWARDS-STUART
____________________

Between:

	ABERTAWE BRO MORGANNWG UNIVERSITY LOCAL HEALTH BOARD	Claimant
	- and -
	DR. IHAB KORASHI	Defendant

____________________

Mr Alistair McGregor QC and Mr Simon Forshaw (instructed by Morgan Cole LLP) for the Claimant
Mr Chris Close assisting the Defendant
Hearing dates: 24 January 2012
____________________

HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT
____________________

Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart:

On 8 February 2012 I handed down judgment dismissing an application by the defendant, Dr Korashi, to set aside a judgment given in his absence on 27 May 2011 by His Honour Judge Peter Clark, sitting as a judge of the High Court. At paragraphs and 90 and 91 of that judgment I invited the parties to make submissions in writing in relation to the costs of the application and, in addition, the Claimant's application for permission to enforce the costs orders made by Nicol and Eady JJ on 12 February and 9 November 2009, respectively.

I have now received and considered the submissions made on behalf of each of the parties.

In my judgment there are no grounds in this case for departing from the usual rule that the unsuccessful party must pay the cost of the successful party. There was no merit in any of the points made by Dr Korashi, and this should have been clear to him from the observations made by the members of the court of appeal in the judicial review proceedings to which I referred in my judgment.

I have also been asked to carry out a summary assessment of the Claimant's costs of the application on the basis of the Schedule of Costs that has been submitted. I am not prepared to do this since the Schedule contains figures that are estimated as opposed to reflecting time actually spent. For example, it is unclear whether the costs have been estimated on the basis of a hearing that lasted just one day or the two days for which it was originally listed. Counsels' fees look high for a 1 day hearing.

In these circumstances I consider that I have no alternative but to refer the costs to detailed assessment, which is to be on the standard basis, if they are not agreed. However, I direct that Dr Korashi is to pay £10,000 on account of those costs by 4 pm on 30 March 2012.

As to the orders for costs made by Nicol and Eady JJ, I can see no reason why the Claimant should not now be permitted to enforce those orders. I therefore grant the Claimant permission to do so. Those orders are varied accordingly.

The Claimant's solicitors or counsel are to draw up an order to reflect this judgment and this is to be submitted to my clerk by e-mail as soon as reasonably possible.

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010