PERCENTAGE COSTS ORDERS AFTER A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: A HIGH COURT DECISION
In Webb -v- Liverpool Womens’ NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 449(QB) HH Judge Saffman (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the consequences where a claimant had beaten their own Part 36 offer at trial. NB this aspect of the…
THE LAST WORKING DAYS OF THE "OLD" PART 36: LINKS TO POSTS & ARTICLES ON THE NEW RULES
The new Part 36 comes into force on the 6th April. Here are links to posts and guidance in relation to the new rules on this blog and then links to many other commentators. POSTS ON THE NEW PART 36…
EVANS -v- WOLVERHAMPTON: PART 36: SERVICE OF NOTICE TO APPEAL AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: IN THE REPORTS AGAIN
The case of Evans -v- The Royal Wolverhampton Hospital Trust [2014] EWHC 3185 (QB) has been examined before in this blog. It was the case where the defendant made an ex parte application for permission to withdraw a Part 36…
THE DANGERS OF A PART 36 OFFER: CLAIMANT PAYS THREE TIMES MORE IN COSTS THAN HE RECEIVED IN DAMAGES
The dangers of a claimant rejecting a Part 36 offer are clearly demonstrated in the case of UWUG Ltd & Haiss -v- Ball [2015] EWHC 74 (IPEC). The claimant received damages of £2,859.20 but was ordered to pay the defendant…
THE NEW PART 36: PART 9: HOW IT REFLECTS AND CHANGES THE EXISTING CASE LAW
This is the 9th in the series on the new Part 36. Here we deal with the relevant case law which may be changed by the new rules. THE EXPLANATORY TEXT Rule changes are usually accompanied by helpful explanatory notes….
PROPORTIONALITY & SURVIVAL FOR LITIGATORS: PART 2: A WHOLE NEW APPROACH?
It is no accident that there is nearly a month between the first post in this series and the second. Nor is it surprising that very little (if anything) has been written on “proportional” litigation. This is a difficult subject….
THE NEW PART 36: PART 8: STRUCTURE OF THE NEW RULE AND A RECAP OF POSTS TO DATE
Here we look at the structure of the new Part 36. The section part of this post recaps and provides links to the earlier posts on the new Part 36. Future posts will deal with the impact of the new…
THE NEW PART 36: PART 6: PERSONAL INJURY CASES
This is the sixth in the series of posts dealing with the new rules governing Part 36 coming into force in April 2015. This post deals with a new section of Part 36 on personal injury cases. This appears to…
THE NEW PART 36: PART 5: WAS THE OFFER A "GENUINE ATTEMPT" TO SETTLE PROCEEDINGS?
One addition to the rule is a further factor for the court to take into account when considering whether or not the usual costs, and other consequences, of Part 36 should apply. THE NEW CPR 36.17: COSTS CONSEQUENCES FOLLOWING JUDGMENT…
THE NEW PART 36: PART 4: WHERE A COSTS BUDGET IS LIMITED TO COURT FEES
This is the fourth in the series of posts on the new Part 36 coming into force on the 6th April 2015. The rules contain a brand new provision that deals with the position where a offeror’s costs are limited…
THE NEW PART 36: PART 3: UNACCEPTED OFFERS AND INCREASED RESTRICTIONS ON DISCLOSURE OF OFFERS
This is the third in the series of posts that deals with the Part 36 provisions coming into force on the 6th April 2015. Here we look at the rules restricting disclosure of a Part 36 offer and some important…
THE NEW PART 36 PART 2: OTHER EFFECTS OF ACCEPTING A PART 36 OFFER
This is the second part of a series dealing with the new provisions of Part 36 which comes into force on the 6th April 2015. The first in the series can be found here. Here we look at the new…
CIVIL LITIGATION: REVIEW OF 2014: PROLIXITY, SANCTIONS, CREATIVE WRITING AND MUCH MORE
It is coming to that time of the year where everyone does an annual review. We civil litigators cannot be left out. Here is an annual review for the past 12 months. If people want to make additional suggestions in…
THE NEW PART 36: COMING TO YOUR PRACTICES SOON: PART 1
The “new” Part 36 comes into force on the 6th April 2015. Here I provide the first part a summary of the main chances. To prevent any confusion this post only cites the new rules. THERE IS NOW AN EXPRESS…
CLAIMANT BEATS OWN PART 36 OFFER AND RECEIVES AN ADDITIONAL £75,000 IN DAMAGES
The advantages to a claimant in making a prompt, and realistic, Part 36 offer are shown in the judgment of Sir David Eady in Downing -v- Peterborough & Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2014] EWHC 4216 (QB). THE KEY POINT…
COSTS OF £7 MILLION: PART 36 BITES HARD ON CLAIMANTS WHO CLEARED A FIRST HURDLE BUT FELL AT THE SECOND
If anyone ever needed a lesson on the risks of litigation they should read the judgment of Mr Justice Eder in Ted Baker plc -v- Axa Insurances UK Plc [2014] EWHC 4178 (Comm). THE CASE There had been a preliminary…
NOMINAL DAMAGES AWARD LEADS TO NO COSTS AT TRIAL & 25% OF COSTS ON APPEAL
In Walker -v- the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis [2014] EWCA Civ 897 the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate costs award when a claimant succeeded on appeal but the appellate court held that he should only recover…
OFFER TO SETTLE HAS MAJOR IMPACT ON COSTS OF CASE: NO SUGARING OF THIS PILL
In Sugar Hut Group Ltd -v- AJ Insurance [2014] EWHC 3775 (Comm) Mr Justice Eder held that an offer of settlement had a major impact on costs even though it was not a valid Part 36 offer and the claimant…
INTEREST AND COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: WATCHORN –v- JUPITER CONSIDERED
There have been relatively few cases dealing with the approach of the courts under the new Part 36 provisions when a claimant beats their own Part 36 offer at trial. The judgment of HH Judge Purle QC in Watchorn -v-…
CAPS ON DAMAGES AND PART 36: THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT
Some interesting and important points of procedure were considered today by H.H. Judge Hacon in Abbot -v- Design & Display Ltd [2014] EWHC 3243 (IPEC). Firstly in relation to the rules of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court and the damages…
YOU CAN'T GO BEHIND THE OTHER SIDE'S BACK WHEN WITHDRAWING A PART 36 OFFER
Mr Justice Leggatt in a judgment given today described the facts in Evans -v- Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2014] EWHC 3185 (QB) as “remarkable”. It raised the question of “whether a party who requires the court’s permission to…
COSTS AFTER VARIATION OF A PART 36 OFFER TO BE LESS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE RECIPIENT: BURRETT -v- MENCAP CONSIDERED
The decision of District Judge Ackroyd in Burreett -v- Mencap Ltd (14th May 2014) was reported on Lawtel earlier this week and is available on Bailli. It contains an important lesson to both defendants and claimants as to costs when…
PART 36 OFFERS AND NON-MONETARY CLAIMS: A HIGH COURT CASE CONSIDERED
We have looked before at the advantages to a claimant in making an early Part offer. If the claimant matches or beats that offer at trial then there are advantages in costs and interests. There can also be a 10%…
LITIGATION AFTER JACKSON (POST DENTON EDITION): 12 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE
In August last year I wrote Litigation after Jackson a 10 point Survival Guide. All of the points made in that post remain valid. I have added another 2 to deal with the situation post -Denton. The biggest danger, post…
NO SPECIFIC FORM OF WRITTEN NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO WITHDRAW A PART 36 OFFER: THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF LEAVING A PART 36 OFFER OPEN
Part 36 offers are relatively easy to withdraw. This is demonstrated by the decision of Flaux J in of Supergroup Plc v JustEnough Software Corp Inc where he rejected an application for a declaration that the the claimant had validly…
COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF PART 36 OFFERS: ANOTHER INTERESTING EXAMPLE
Following the earlier post on Part 36 offers I am grateful to Marcus Davies from DWF for pointing me in the direction of the decision of Mrs Justice Andrews in Davison –v- Leitch [2013] EWHC 3092 (QB). This provides another…
THE COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF PART 36 OFFERS: DO THEY ALWAYS APPLY? THE CASES IN DETAIL
The costs consequences when a claimant fails to beat a Part 36 from the defendant are well known and long established. The advantages for a claimant who now beats their own offer were examined in a previous post. Here we…
MEDIATE OR ELSE? THE COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF REFUSING TO MEDIATE
A recent post looked at the Court of Appeal mediation scheme and examined the potential penalties for a party refusing to mediate. In PGF II SA –v- OMES Company I Limited [2013] EWCA CIV 1288 the Court of Appeal looked…
PART 36: A NEAR MISS IS NOT ENOUGH
A recent case emphasises that a “near miss” with a Part 36 offer is not relevant to the court’s assessment of costs after a trial. There was, for a time, a developing jurisprudence around “near miss” offers and…
THANKS FOR THE £500,000. NOW WHERE’S THE EXTRA £50,000 YOU OWE ME? KNOWING THE RISKS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE CLAIMANT IN THE NEW PART 36
The new provisions when a claimant beats their own Part 36 provide challenges (including potential negligence claims) for the claimant lawyer. A claimant who beats their own Part 36 offer at trial now obtains considerable benefit. CPR 36.13(3) states that…
You must be logged in to post a comment.