Calokerinos, Executor of the Estate of the late George Sclavos v Yesilhat; Yesilhat v Calokerinos, Executor of the Estate of the late George Sclavos (No. 6)

The case between Calokerinos, the executor of the estate of the late George Sclavos, and Yesilhat involved protracted legal proceedings which now continue only between the plaintiff and the second defendant. The first defendant is bankrupt and the third defendant, a company, is in liquidation. The plaintiff estate sought costs under the Civil Procedure Act 2005, while the second defendant contested the amount and nature of the costs. The court was required to decide whether the evidence provided by the second defendant was sufficient to support the making of specified gross sum costs orders under section 98(4)(c) of the Act, and to determine the appropriate gross sums for costs in favour of each party.

The court considered the evidence presented by both parties and the factors relevant to a costs assessment under the Act. The court found that the evidence provided by the second defendant was not sufficient to support the making of specified gross sum costs orders in their favour. However, the court did find that particular costs orders made in favour of the plaintiff estate against the second defendant were appropriate. The court then proceeded to determine the appropriate gross sums for costs in favour of each party, taking into account the factors relevant to a costs assessment under the Act. The court determined that the gross sums fixed for costs should not be set-off against one another.

In conclusion, the court made orders for specified gross sum costs in favour of the plaintiff estate and against the second defendant. The court also made orders that the gross sums fixed for costs should not be set-off against one another. The court's decision provides guidance on the factors to be considered in assessing costs under the Civil Procedure Act 2005, and the appropriate approach to costs assessment in protracted legal proceedings.