CLAIMANT ACCEPTING PART 36 OFFER LATE: COURT ORDERED INDEMNITY COSTS FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN EXPIRY AND ACCEPTANCE
In Lokhova v Longmuir [2017] EWHC 3152 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered the court’s discretion when a claimant accepted a defendant’s Part 36 offer late. KEY POINTS A court had jurisdiction to vary the normal order for costs when a claimant…
PROVING THINGS 80: PROVING A SUBROGATED CLAIM: HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS NOT RECOVERED IN FULL
It is not uncommon for an insurer to seek to add a claim for outlay to a claim. This is particularly the case in relation to health insurers who seek to recover outlay in a claim for damages for personal…
WITNESSES WHO ARGUE THE CASE AND EXPERTS WHO ACT AS ADVOCATES: THIS IS NOT GOING TO HELP …
In British Telecommunications Plc v Office Of Communications [2017] CAT 25 the Competition Appeal Tribunal commented on two of the central evidential issues of much commercial litigation: witnesses who give much commentary and “argue” the case; experts who act as advocates. …
SECOND ACTION NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT RESOURCES DOES NOT “TRUMP THE OVERRIDING NEED TO DO JUSTICE”
In Davies v Carillion Energy Services Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 3206 (QB) Mr Justice Morris upheld a finding that a second claim brought by the claimant was not an abuse of process. “…even post-Jackson, ultimately, the importance of the efficient…
You must be logged in to post a comment.