THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EX-SOLDIER FAILS IN HER CASE AND NOW NO LONGER HAS THE PROTECTION OF QOCS
Here we look at a case where the claimant was found to be fundamentally dishonest. The judge commented on the irony of the fact that she had a substantial claim for damages, even without that dishonesty. Nevertheless the evidence of…
SERVICE POINTS 7: WHAT’S IN A NAME? DOES THE DEFENDANT’S CHANGE OF NAME MEAN THAT SERVICE WAS DEFECTIVE?
Here we are looking at an interesting argument in relation to whether service was effective after a party had changed their name. The defendant argued that the name change meant they had not been served properly and were not a…
COST BITES 285: DOES THE COURT NEED TO VARY THE RECEIVING PARTY’S BUDGET WHEN IT HAS ORDERED THAT COSTS BE PAID ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS?
We are looking again at the award of indemnity costs. The judge ordered that costs be paid to the claimant on the indemnity basis. He then went on to consider whether, given that decision, it was necessary to retrospectively vary…
COST BITES 284: DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS PLAY A PART IN A DECISION TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS: “DEPRIVING THE DEFENDANT OF THE USUAL RIGHT NOT TO PAY DISPROPORTIONATE COSTS, IS AN ENTIRELY PROPORTIONATE RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT OF THIS ACTION”
Here we look at a judgment where indemnity costs were awarded against an unsuccessful defendant. As we shall see there were a number of factors in that decision. However it is notable that, in both judgments, the judge commented on…
You must be logged in to post a comment.