COSTS AFTER CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER ACCEPTED LATE: FIXED COSTS, ASSESSED COSTS OR INDEMNITY COSTS? CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION
I am grateful to Jonathan Frith from Winns solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Walden-Smith in Hislop -v- Perde a decision made in the County Court at Central London. I set the decision out in…
COSTS AFTER A PART 36 OFFER AFFECTED BY THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE: CONDUCT OF DEFENCE ALONE SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY INDEMNITY COSTS
I have written several times about the judgment of Thirlwall LJ in Marsh -v- MOJ*. I have been provided with a copy of a note of the judgment on costs given on the 31st July 2017. I am grateful to…
YOU OFFERED ME £100,000: I’VE ACCEPTED £15,000- OH AND I WANT MY COSTS: THE DANGERS OF NOT NEGOTIATING AND WHY THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS
I tried to summarise the judgment of Mr Justice Mann in Jordan -v- MGN Limited [2017] EWHC 1937 (Ch) and I found it difficult. Every word of the judgment is important. It shows, at least, a very insouciant, approach by the…
WHEN CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE AFTER A BUDGET IS CONFINED TO COURT FEES: DECISION TO ALTER BUDGET UPHELD
In Asghar -v- Bhatti[ 2017] EWHC 1702 (QB) Mr Justice Lewis considered an issue in relation to varying a budget that was confined to court fees. The court considered “change of circumstances” – this is also a case that shows…
THE EXISTENCE OF PART 36 OFFERS MEANT THAT COSTS WERE RESERVED TO THE END OF THE CASE
In Interactive Technology Corporation Limited -v- Ferster [2017] EWGC 1510 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan held that the existence of Part 36 offers by the defendants meant that the issue of costs after a preliminary hearing had to be reserved to…
MACHISMO OR MADNESS? THE DANGERS OF MAKING A “TIME LIMITED” OFFER OR WITHDRAWING A PART 36 OFFER
There may be tactical advantages to making a “time limited” offer, or withdrawing a Part 36 offer after 21 days. However this can backfire badly. We have already looked at the decision in Thakkar -v- Singh [2017] EWCA 117 in…
INTEREST ON DAMAGES AFTER FAILING TO BEAT A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER: THE AIM IS TO ENCOURAGE GOOD PRACTICE AND NOT SIMPLY TO COMPENSATE
In Ovm Petrom SA -v- Glencore International SA [2017] EWCA Civ 195 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision not to award 10% interest on damages in a case where a defendant failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer….
NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT HAD TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £500,000
In Lyons -v- Fox Williams LLP [2017] EWHC 532 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered issues relating to costs after a claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim for professional negligence. THE CASE The claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim…
WITHDRAWAL OF PART 36 OFFER BY EMAIL: CPR 3.10 SAVES THE CLAIMANT
The change in the discount rate meant that many claimants withdraw Part 36 offers they had made. This has led to the question – is an email withdrawing an offer sufficient. I am grateful to Dominic Graham from Holmes &…
COSTS AFTER NOMINAL DAMAGES AND PART 36 OFFERS: THE CLAIMANTS WHO TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GOT £2.00 INSTEAD
We looked at the decision of Mr Justice Leggatt in Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) in an earlier post. The judge held that the defendants were in breach but that the claimants had suffered no loss….
COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED
The previous post looked at the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car Giant Limited -v- the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hammersmith [2017] EWHC 197 (TCC). Here we look at the subsequent judgment on costs at [2017]…
CHANGES TO THE DISCOUNT RATE: WITHDRAWING PART 36 OFFERS: IMPORTANT FOR CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS
I wrote yesterday of the practical steps that need to be taken by both parties as a result of the changes to the discount rate (that post is on the Zenith PI Blog and is available here). One point that…
CONSEQUENCES OF LATE ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
There is a useful report on the PIC website of a case where a claimant obtained indemnity costs after the defendant’s late acceptance of its Part 36 offer The case of Car Craft Test Centre -v- Trotman a decision by…
ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: ITS NOT MONEY IN THE BANK
The judgment of Sir Anthony Edwards-Stuart in Lloyds Bank -v- McBains Cooper [2017] EWHC 30 (TCC) considers the question of issue based costs orders. What is interesting here is: Neither party appears to have made a valid Part 36 offer….
COSTS AT THE END OF A CASE: INDEMNITY COSTS, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT AND GOING BEYOND THE COSTS BUDGET
In Barkhuysen -v- Hamilton [2016] EWHC 3371 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered matters relating to costs after a trial. The defendant’s conduct led to an order for indemnity costs being made. The judge also identified those areas in which the claimant…
CLAIMANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT LEAD TO JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM: A MARATHON EFFORT BUT TO NO AVAIL
In Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2016] EWHC 2615 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt rejected an argument that the claimant’s acceptance of a Part 36 offer meant that a defendant was entitled to judgment on its counterclaim. KEY POINTS The…
PART 36 CONSEQUENCES AND A FIXED COSTS REGIME: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY MEET?
In the judgment today in Phonographic Performance Ltd -v- Raymond Hagan [2016] EWHC 3076 (IPEC) Judge Hacon considered the interaction between a fixed costs regime and Part 36. KEY POINTS The fixed cost rules in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court…
PART 36: OFFER DID NOT COVER COSTS OF ADJUDICATIONS
In Wes Futures Limited -v- Allen Wilson Construction Limited [2016] EWHC 2863 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson considered the terms of an offer from the claimant that the Defendant accepted 10 months afterwards. Curiously it was the claimant that was arguing…
PART 36 OFFERS AND COSTS: COSTS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN OFFER HAS BEEN "BEATEN"
In Transocean Drilling UK Ltd -v- Providence Resources PLC [2016] EWHC 2611 (Comm) Mr Justice Popplewell considered the impact of a Part 36 offer in unusual circumstances. These circumstances led the court to consider whether the impact of costs should…
LATE ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS: TWO CONTRASTING CASES & THE GREAT DEBATE
There is an ongoing debate about whether the Defendant should, or does, face any adverse consequences when a Claimant’s Part 36 offer is accepted late. I had a recent email from solicitor John McQuater of Atherton Godfrey. Here I…
HAS A PART 36 OFFER BEEN BEATEN WHEN THE VALUE OF CURRENCY CHANGES? A HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt today in Novus Aviation Ltd -v- Alubaf Arab International Bank BSC (c) [2016] EWHC 1937 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on Part 36 offers. KEY POINTS A claimant “beat” its own Part 36 offer…
CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS: WHEN HAS THE CLAIMANT BEATEN ITS OWN OFFER? AN INTERESTING QUESTION
The judgment of HH Judge Pelling QC in Purrunsing -v- A’Court & Co (a firm) [2016] EWHC 1582 (Ch) considers the impact of interest on a claimant’s Part 36 offer. Should the court simply compare the offer with the sum…
PART 36: ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS AND INTEREST
In Bolt Burdon -v- Tariq [2016] EWHC 1507 (QB) Mr Justice Spencer considered the appropriate approach to additional liabilities where a claimant beats its own Part 36 offer and interest was awarded on a contractual basis. However the judgment appears…
PROVING THINGS 22: DAMAGES, MITIGATION , PART 36 (AND EVEN SOMETHING ABOUT BUNDLES)
The Court of Appeal decision today in Pawar -v- JSD Haulage Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 551 contains some important lessons in relation to proving damages, mitigation of loss and Part 36 offers. “The fact that a claimant does not mitigate…
INDEMNITY COSTS ON APPEAL AFTER PART 36 OFFER
For the second time today I express my thanks to John McQuater. This time for drawing my attention to the Court of Appeal decision on costs in Summers -v- Bundy (11/02/2016)* This case shows the importance of making Part 36…
PART 36: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A DEFENDANT ACCEPTS OUT OF TIME
I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Besford in the case of Sutherland -v- Khan (21st April 2016) (a copy of the transcript is attached to this blog here …
COSTS SHOULD NOT NORMALLY BE REDUCED WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
|n Webb -v-Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2016]EWCA Civ 365 the Court of Appeal overturned an “issue based” decision on costs in a case where a claimant had beaten there own Part 36 offer. “It is a sad fact that…
AN ATTEMPT TO LIMIT COSTS MAKES A CALDERBANK OFFER INEFFECTIVE
In Burrell -v- Clifford [2016] EWHC 578 (Ch) Mr R Spearman QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) decided that an offer which was equivalent to the sum awarded in damages was not effective because the defendant also…
PART 36: THE COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF LATE ACCEPTANCE
The case of ABC -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 500 (QB) decided earlier today provides an object lesson on the dangers of Part 36. His Honour Judge McKenna considered whether he should depart from the “usual rules” in…
PART 36 OFFER DID NOT ENCOMPASS PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT: COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: A BAD DAY AT THE OFFICE
The Court of Appeal decision yesterday in Littlestone -v- Macleish [2016] EWCA Civ 127 deals with important elements of Part 36 offers. Not least the importance of stating, with absolute clarity, whether an offer is exclusive or inclusive of previous…
FIXED COSTS AND PART 36: THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
The Court of Appeal has given judgment today in Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. “Where a claimant makes a successful Part 36 offer in a section IIIA case, he will be awarded fixed costs to the last staging…
LORD CHANCELLOR GETS A BONUS: THE POWERFUL RESULTS OF A CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER
There are many interesting issues in the judgment of Mr Justice Holgate in The Lord Chancellor -v- Charles Ete & Co [2016] EWHC 275 (QB) which may be interesting to examine at a later date. However one significant point was…
NOT A RACING CERTAINTY BUT INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER
In Jockey Club Racehorse Ltd -v- Willmott Dixon Construction Limited [2016] EWHC 167 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart held that a claimant’s Part 36 offer to settle for 95% was a relevant offer and had costs consequences for the defendant. KEY…
"NEAR MISS" RULE NO LONGER APPLICABLE: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ON COSTS
In Sugar Hut Group Limited -v- AJ Insurance Services [2016] EWCA Civ 46 the Court of Appeal overturned an award of costs made against a successful party. “The Claimants’ recovery exceeded the Part 36 offer by a comfortable margin and…
COSTS,INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS: (OR "COPPERS COP IT")
In Mohidin -v-Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2016] EWHC 105 (QB) Mr Justice Gilbart carried out an extensive review of the principles relating to contribution proceedings and costs. KEY POINTS Two police officers who had been involved in the…
COSTS AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL: PART 36; UNNECESSARY EXPERT REPORTS; PROPORTIONALITY AND USELESS BUNDLES: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE
The short judgment of Mr Justice Males in C&S Associates UK Limited -v- Enterprise Insurance Company PLC [2016] EWHC 67 (Comm) encapsulates many of the problems of contemporary litigation. “It is important that those litigating in this court are aware…
PART 36, THE COMPENSATION RECOVERY UNIT AND COSTS: A SIGNIFICANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Crooks -v- Hendricks Lovell Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal considered some significant issues in relation to the interrelationship between Part 36 and the CRU situation in personal injury cases. KEY POINTS A claimant who recovered…
FIXED COSTS, PART 36 AND THE PROTOCOL: A DIFFERENT OUTCOME
NB this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal. Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. The post earlier today on fixed costs after Part 36 offers led Benjamin Williams QC to, kindly, send me a decision of Smith -v-…
FIXED COSTS AND CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS
This case must be read with the Court of decision in Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. This effectively overrides this decision. Fixed costs do not apply when indemnity costs are ordered. There is a report, helpfully put online by…
PART 36: WHEN THE NORMAL COSTS PENALTIES MAY NOT APPLY
In Yentob -v-MGN Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1292 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the judge not to impose the normal penalties when a claimant failed to beat a Part 36 offer. KEY POINTS When a party fails…
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS & FAILURE TO MEDIATE: CLAIMANT BEATS OWN OFFER AND COSTS INCREASED BY 10%
The claimant beat its own Part 36 offer on costs in the case of Reid -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B21. Consequently costs were increased by 10% and additional interest accrued. “If the party unwilling to mediate is…
IS THIS A CLAIMANT'S OR DEFENDANT'S OFFER? ANOTHER IMPORTANT HIGH COURT DECISION ON PART 36
In Van Orrd Uk Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3385 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson considered the appropriate consequences when the defendant had beaten its own Part 36 offer. These were unusual circumstances in that the court had to…
CLARIFICATION OF A PART 36 OFFER HAS A MAJOR EFFECT ON COSTS
CPR 36.8 STATES “(1) The offeree may, within 7 days of a Part 36 offer being made, request the offeror to clarify the offer”. In Bailes -v- Bloom (23/11/2015, Simler J QBD)* the fact that clarification had been provided had…
WHEN TWO RULES COLLIDE:PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT OVERRIDE NEED TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM
In The Former Owners of the Motor Vessel “Melissa K” -v- The Former Owners of the Motor Tanker “Tomsk” [2015] EWHC 3445 (Admlty) Mr Justice Males considered the interplay between Part 36 and the need to serve. It is an…
COSTS WHERE A CLAIMANT ACCEPTS A PART 36 OFFER LATE: TWO CASES WHERE THE CLAIMANTS CAME TO GRIEF
When a claimant accepts a Part 36 offer late costs become at large. Here we look at two cases where late acceptance of a Part 36 offer had grave consequences for a claimant.* “A claimant who pursues a claim in…
SUCCESSFUL PART 36 OFFER BY CLAIMANT ATTRACTS INDEMNITY COSTS ONLY FROM THE DATE OF EXPIRY OF THE OFFER: A HIGH COURT CASE
In RXDX -v- Northampton Borough Council [2015] EWHC 2938 (QB) Sir Colin Mackay revised an order in relation to indemnity costs following a Part 36 offer. THE CASE On the 12th March 2015 the claimant offered to settle the issue…
IS THIS A PART 36 OFFER I SEE BEFORE ME? THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION
The decision of Mr Justice Morgan in Tim-Alexander Gunther Nikolaus Hertel -v- Artemis International Sarl [2015] EWHC 2848 (Ch) involves a complex set of facts but is extremely important in terms of construction of Part 36 offers. (It is perhaps…
A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT ATTRACT INDEMNITY COSTS: GULATI -v- MGN
In Gulati -v- MGN [2015] EWHC 1805 (Ch) Mr Justice Mann considered whether indemnity costs should be awarded in circumstances where a Part 36 offer was withdrawn in one case and a “Calderbank” offer made in the other. KEY POINTS…
INCREASED INTEREST AND COSTS AFTER CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER: JUDGMENT FOR THREE TIMES MORE THAN CLAIMANT'S OFFER
In Thai Airways International Public Company Ltd -v- KI Holdings Co Ltd [2015] EWHC 1476 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggat made slight modifications to the additional amounts to be awarded to a claimant which had beaten its own part 36 offer….
VERY IMPORTANT DECISION ON PART 36 OFFERS, ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS WHEN OFFERS NOT BEATEN
The decision of Mrs Justice Slade DBE in Cashman -v- Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1312 (QB) deals with the additional sums that a party may have to pay when it fails to beat a Part 36 offer….
You must be logged in to post a comment.