Saint-Gobain Pam SA v Fusion Provida Ltd & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 258
LORD JUSTICE PETER GIBSON:
[1]We are now asked to determine a few matters arising out of our judgments.[2]On costs, the only question is whether the successful respondent should receive from the unsuccessful appellants not only the costs of the appeal but also of the respondent's notice. We think that the respondent's notice was a proper one. Although it did not succeed, we do not think that there should be any discount for that. We will therefore award the successful respondent all the costs of the appeal, including of the respondent's notice.[3]We do not think that this is an appropriate case for us to assess the costs in this court summarily.[4]There is no dispute that there should be interest at the judgment rate on the costs in this court. We were asked to make an order for interest on costs of the action before Pumfrey J. We do not think that we should be making any such order. That is a matter to be taken up, if necessary, with the judge.[5]We are asked, but it was not pressed, to grant a certificate of contested validity. The judge made that order. We do not think it appropriate to make any such order in this court.[6]The last matter is whether there should be permission to appeal. We do not think it appropriate that we ourselves should give such permission. That is a matter for the House of Lords to decide themselves.