Application by plaintiff for indemnity costs following court's rejection of defendant's request for compensation based on the plaintiff's undertaking as to damages
Defendant's request for compensation wholly misconceived
Whether basis for indemnity costs established
Quick Take
1An undertaking as to damages given to obtain interlocutory injunctive relief is only engaged where the injunction is subsequently shown to have been wrongly granted; where the party obtaining the injunction succeeds at trial and permanent relief is awarded, the condition triggering the undertaking does not arise.
2Pursuing a wholly misconceived application in wilful disregard of communications from both the opposing party's solicitors and the court alerting the applicant to the absence of any legal basis may warrant indemnity costs, even where the applicant is self-represented.
3A self-represented litigant's status may justify procedural latitude but does not operate as a shield against an indemnity costs order where there is otherwise a compelling case for such an order.
