COST BITES 206: THE COURT WOULD NOT MAKE A SUBSTANTIAL ORDER FOR COSTS WHEN AN AMENDMENT TO A REPLY ABANDONS AN ALLEGATION OF FRAUD: (ALSO THE DANGERS OF PLEADING FRAUD WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS)

In Packer v Packer [2025] EWHC 27 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered issues of costs after a claimant had amended a Reply to withdraw an allegation of fraud.  The judge did not accept the defendant's argument that she should be immediately entitled to a substantial awa...

Enjoying this post?

Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and access all premium content.

Become a member

Already a member? Log in below