Discontinuance and costs in practice

posted in: Uncategorized | 0

FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY v (1) DA VINCI INVEST LTD (2) DA VINCI INVEST PTE LTD (3) MINEWORLD LTD (4) SZABOLCS BANYA (5) GYORGY SZABOLCS BRAD (6) TAMAS PORNYE (7) BIVONAS LAW LLP, Ch D (Nugee J) 10/12/2018

The Financial Conduct Authority proposed to discontinue claim against defendant law firm and declined recovery of its costs as the facts did not rebut the CPR r.39.6 presumption that when a claimant discontinued proceedings, the defendant should recover its costs unless the claimant could show a change of circumstances to which it had not contributed. There was no evidence of unreasonable conduct on the part of the defendant such as to provide a good reason to depart from the rule.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.