The Court of Appeal has ordered Debra James to pay the costs of her unsuccessful appeal against the striking out of proceedings against James Watters, while staying execution of the costs order during a specified Supreme Court appeal process.
In a ruling delivered on 12 June 2023, Ms Justice Butler said the court had rejected James’s appeal in a judgment delivered on 10 May. That appeal concerned an ex tempore High Court decision striking out her proceedings against the second named defendant, who was the respondent to the appeal. The June ruling addressed costs only.
The parties had been invited to make written submissions on appeal costs, and both did so. Butler said the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 generally entitles a party entirely successful in civil proceedings to costs, unless the court orders otherwise after considering the case circumstances, the parties’ conduct and the statutory factors. At the end of the May judgment, she had indicated a provisional view that the respondent should receive his appeal costs.
James’s submissions did not identify grounds under the statutory factors that would justify departing from the usual costs order, Butler said. She noted that much of the submission argued that the May judgment was legally incorrect, but said the costs decision had to proceed on the judgment as it stood.
The other ground was, in effect, a plea of poverty or hardship. Butler referred to an inconsistency with James’s position in the substantive proceedings, where she had alleged the defendants encouraged her to bring unmeritorious proceedings because she represented “potentially very lucrative business” and “was reasonably well off”. The judge said limited means generally did not determine whether a costs order should be made, and that the respondent’s ability to enforce such an order was a separate question.
The court ordered the respondent’s appeal costs against the appellant. It also stayed execution pending the timely filing of James’s envisaged application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court; if filed, the stay continues until that application is determined and, if leave is granted, until the appeal is determined. The ruling does not state that the leave application had been filed or granted.