Mozambique vs Credit Suisse: High Court rules on complex costs issue

Background and Context

The High Court recently delivered a judgment concerning the allocation of costs in a complex case involving the Republic of Mozambique, Credit Suisse International, and the Privinvest Companies. The case, heard in the Business and Property Courts of England & Wales, revolved around allegations of bribery and financial misconduct.

The Parties Involved

The Republic of Mozambique, represented by its Attorney General, was the claimant in this case. The defendants included Credit Suisse International and the Privinvest Companies, among others. Ms Lucas, the former Director of Treasury of Mozambique, was also implicated but was not directly sued by Mozambique.

Key Legal Issues

The primary legal issue addressed in this judgment was the allocation of costs related to a CPR Part 20 claim brought by the Privinvest Companies against Ms Lucas. The Privinvest Companies sought to have Mozambique cover the costs they incurred in their claim against Ms Lucas, as well as the costs Ms Lucas incurred in defending herself.

Ms Lucas's Position

Ms Lucas, represented by Duncan Bagshaw, limited her claim for costs against the Privinvest Companies to 50% of her total costs from the date of service of their additional claim against her. This approach was deemed logical and efficient given the complexity of the proceedings.

Privinvest Companies' Argument

Frederick Wilmot-Smith, representing the Privinvest Companies, argued that the costs should be considered on a three-party basis. He contended that Mozambique should bear the costs since it was responsible for the underlying allegations against Ms Lucas.

Court's Analysis and Decision

Justice Robin Knowles CBE exercised discretion under the Senior Courts Act 1981 to determine the just allocation of costs. He concluded that the Privinvest Companies should bear the costs of their additional claim against Ms Lucas. The Court found it unreasonable for the Privinvest Companies to expect Mozambique to cover these costs, given that Mozambique did not bring a claim against Ms Lucas.

Conclusion and Implications

The Court ordered the Privinvest Companies to pay Ms Lucas's costs, calculated as 50% of her costs from the date of service of the additional claim, as well as the costs of her successful application to strike out the claim. The Privinvest Companies were also ordered to make a payment on account of £450,000 to Ms Lucas by the end of March 2025.

Impact on Future Cases

This judgment highlights the complexities involved in multi-party litigation and the careful consideration required in allocating costs. It serves as a reminder of the importance of strategic decisions in litigation, particularly in cases involving multiple parties and allegations of serious misconduct.

Learn More

For more information on shareholder law, see BeCivil's guide to Shareholder Law.