PART 36: CONDUCT & REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT'S COSTS: A SETTLEMENT STRATEGY THAT WAS "COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC"

PART 36: CONDUCT & REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT’S COSTS: A SETTLEMENT STRATEGY THAT WAS “COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC”

In Moradi v The Home Office (Costs) [2022] EWHC 3125 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the appropriate costs consequences where a case settled on the eve of trial.  The defendant made a Part 36 offer…

EXPERTS: A PARTY CANNOT INSIST THAT A SINGLE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT BE MALE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

In N (A Child), Re (Instruction of Expert) [2022] EWCA Civ 1588 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a single joint expert should have been male.  The judgment emphasises the point that a party wishing to argue for…

WHEN YOU DON’T CALL THE OTHER SIDE’S EXPERTS TO COURT, BUT WANT TO CHALLENGE THEIR CONCLUSIONS: ANOTHER CASE

The post yesterday dealt with a case where the claimants failed in its attempt to go behind the defendant’s experts in a case where the claimants’ expert was never disclosed. Similar issues were considered in the interesting decision of the…