Lifestyles Equities CV & Anor v Sportsdirect.com Retail Ltd & Ors

For court-fee purposes, a claim for damages remains a claim to recover money even where damages are to be assessed through an inquiry. An account of profits is different: it is a non-money claim involving an investigation into whether profits have been made and are payable.

Where a claim combines an account of profits with an alternative claim for damages, the money-claim fee is payable. The alternative remedies remain mutually exclusive until the claimant elects to pursue an inquiry. A claim confined to trade mark infringement and an account of profits would attract only the fee for a non-money remedy.

The claimants brought proceedings for registered trade mark infringement and inducing breach of contract. They sought injunctions and other non-monetary relief, together with an account of profits for the infringement and an inquiry as to damages for inducing breach of contract.

The defendants applied to stay the proceedings until the appropriate court fee was paid. The claimants had paid the fee prescribed for proceedings seeking a non-money remedy. The issue was whether the claim, including the alternative damages inquiry, required the higher fee applicable to a claim to recover a sum of money.

1. Application granted. The claimants had not paid the appropriate court fee, and the claim was stayed until that fee was paid.
2. Under the Court Proceedings Fees Order 2008, a claim for damages is a claim to recover a sum of money. That remains so where the amount is to be determined by an inquiry. The court’s task is to determine the amount payable, and there is no principled distinction between a claim for specified damages, assessed damages and damages subject to an inquiry.
3. The court followed the reasoning in Page v Hewetts Solicitors [2013] EWHC 2845 (Ch) that an account is a non-money claim. An account is a process by which the court investigates whether the defendant made profits to which the claimant is entitled. It may result in a finding that no profits were made and that no money is payable.
4. The separate claim for an inquiry as to damages for inducing breach of contract was therefore sufficient to require the money-claim fee. It was fatal to the claimants’ contention that the whole claim was a non-money claim.
5. If the proceedings had concerned only trade mark infringement and an account of profits, the non-money-remedy fee would have been appropriate. The account and damages remedies were mutually exclusive, but the claim became one to recover money when the claimant elected for an inquiry.