Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
The Commercial Court has ordered indemnity costs in order to dissuade parties in substantial litigation from pursuing meritless claims. The judge in Deutsche Bank v Sebastian Holdings Inc.  All ER (D) 118 (Nov) had earlier warned parties to reconsider their positions, but no substantial concessions had been made. The judge also criticised the practice of parties making substantial written closing submissions in place of the traditional oral arguments where the court had the opportunity to question and challenge the arguments advanced.
Deutsche Bank obtained judgment in respect of $240m (£146m) trading losses incurred during the financial crisis. Sebastian's counterclaims for $8 billion in compensation for breach of contract and duty failed (see paras 1426, 1427 and 1588 of the judgment).
Mr Justice Cooke, whose judgment ran to more than 400 pages criticised the positions taken by the parties on certain issues as 'unrealistic'. He had invited the parties early in the proceedings to reconsider their positions and to apply the 'red face test' as to whether an argument should be pursued. He noted there were 'no concessions of any substance at any stage, as revealed by the extensive closing submissions which took just about every possible point, however good or bad, including many fall-back arguments' (para 39 of the judgment).
In the event, written opening submissions ran to 930 and 845 pages and closing submissions 1530 and 1336 pages.
Cooke J concluded that it may be appropriate to treat the pursuit of some of the issues as 'outside the norm' and to award indemnity costs in relation to them 'in the probably forlorn hope that it may discourage other litigants from pursuing hopeless points'. Reports in The Lawyer indicate that Sebastian has been ordered to pay indemnity costs of £51 million, being 85% of Deutsche Bank's legal bill.
The judge also expressed concern that it would be 'regrettable' if, in future substantial litigation, the practice of extensive written submissions by parties subverted the traditional approach of oral closing submissions where the court could 'question, challenge and probe' the arguments (see paragraph 1593 of the judgment).
• Court: Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court
• Judge: Mr Justice Cooke
• Date of judgment: 8 November 2013
This article was first published on Lexis®PSL Dispute Resolution on 14 November 2013. Click here for a free 24 trial of Lexis®PSL.
0330 161 1234