Judgment has recently been handed down in the appeal in Infinity Distribution Ltd v The Khan Partnership LLP  EWHC 1657 (Ch). The appellant appealed against an order that an ATE insurance-backed deed of indemnity was adequate and acceptable security for its costs, because of the appellant’s potential adverse costs exposure relating to the costs of the top-up in the ATE insurance and the issuance of the deed, which the respondent argued were recoverable under transitional provisions in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. The Judge held that the size and potential recoverability of the costs of procuring the increased ATE cover and the deed were not relevant to the adequacy of the deed.
Albert Sampson successfully represented the Respondent on appeal. A copy of the judgment can be found here