Wills & Ors v Crown Estate Commissioners & Ors

Where an appeal produces mixed success and the sums in issue are modest, the court may make no order as to the costs of the appeal. The court should also consider whether further costs proceedings are proportionate, particularly where both parties have already succeeded on one issue and failed on another.

This was a costs judgment following an appeal from the Supreme Court Costs Office. In an earlier judgment dated 14 July, the court concluded that the appellants had succeeded on the interest point but failed on the discretion point. The court had indicated that the appeal was disproportionate and that both parties had incurred excessive costs in relation to modest sums. After both sides made further written submissions on costs, the court determined the appropriate order.

1. The appeal had produced mixed results: the appellants had won on the interest point but lost on the discretion point.
2. The court considered the appeal disproportionate because substantial time and costs had been spent on modest sums. It had therefore indicated that the costs issue would be decided on written representations, although it had discouraged further detailed submissions.
3. Having considered the parties’ submissions and the reasons given in the earlier judgment, the court held that the proper order was no order as to costs on the appeal.

The judgment arose from an appeal from the Supreme Court Costs Office. The court’s earlier judgment of 14 July determined the substantive appeal, finding for the appellants on the interest point and against them on the discretion point. This judgment determined the resulting costs order.