One day late acceptance of part 36 offer puts costs in play – Legal Futures

‘An automatic entitlement to costs under part 36 only arises if the offer is accepted within the “relevant period”, the High Court has ruled.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 21st January 2021

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

CA: Judge was wrong not to order all of part 36 enhanced awards – Litigation Futures

Posted November 18th, 2020 in appeals, costs, indemnities, interest, news, part 36 offers, telecommunications by sally

‘Making one of the four enhanced awards of beating a part 36 offer does not “in any way” undermine or lessen entitlement to the others, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 18th November 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Court of Appeal refuses permission to appeal Swift v Carpenter – Litigation Futures

‘The Court of Appeal has refused permission to appeal Swift v Carpenter, its recent decision that replaced the Roberts v Johnstone formula for calculating accommodation claims by injured people.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 6th November 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

The cost of wrongly alleging breach of good faith: Part 36 offers and indemnity costs – Local Government Lawyer

Posted October 30th, 2020 in contracts, damages, local government, news, part 36 offers, waste by sally

‘A High Court judge’s decisions in a multi-million pound dispute between a council and a waste company are helpful in understanding the Court’s approach to duties of good faith – and the consequences of making allegations of bad faith without sufficient evidence, write Judith Hopper and Rory Budworth.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 30th October 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Keep part 36 offers simple by using form, judge urges – Litigation Futures

Posted September 30th, 2020 in civil procedure rules, interpretation, judges, news, part 36 offers, service, time limits by sally

‘A High Court judge has told parties making part 36 offers that if they simply used form N242A “much of the difficulty” the scheme has caused litigants over the years would be avoided.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 28th September 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Evans v Betesh Partnership and McGinty [2020] EWHC 1589 (QB) – Parklane Plowden Chambers

‘High Court decision (24/06/20) concerning solicitor/barrister professional negligence arising out of a personal injury case.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 24th June 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Success Fee Recoverability in 1975 Act Claims: Re H [2020] EWHC 1134 (Fam) – Pallant Chambers

‘The general rule in civil litigation is that costs “follow the event”. In an article I wrote for the special issue of Civil Justice Quarterly on Civil Litigation Costs, Vol. 32 pages 109-312 Issue 2 2013, I discussed the negative impact that this rule can have on access to justice: not only is the losing party hit with two bills rather than one, but the losing party has no direct control over the costs incurred by the successful party.’

Full Story

Pallant Chambers, 26th June 2020

Source: www.pallantchambers.co.uk

The price of an unreasonable refusal to engage: ADR, Litigation and cost consequences – 3PB

‘The touchstone of all ADR procedures is that parties enter into them voluntarily. However, there is an increasing body of case law in the English courts that suggests mediation should be seriously considered:

a. before litigation is entered into. Failure to do so may result in adverse or impacted
costs for a client, even if successful; and

b. in the course of litigation (instigated by the parties and increasingly with court
directions) an unreasonable refusal of a request to mediate may have bearing on
Part 36 offers and costs.

Full Story

3PB, 8th June 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

CFA Costs Allowed in second 1975 Act Claim – Parklane Plowden Chambers

Posted May 18th, 2020 in chambers articles, costs, families, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘Re H (Deceased), SH v NH and KH [2020] EWHC 1134 (Fam) was a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 heard on 24 April and 24 May 2020 before Cohen J. The successful adult claimant was awarded a contribution of 25% to her CFA uplift by Cohen J as part of her claim. Re H was a case heard hot on the heels of Bullock v Denton in which the successful adult claimant in a 1975 Act claim was also awarded a cost contribution as part of her award.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 12th May 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Claimant loses 15% of costs for “engrained” exaggeration – Litigation Futures

Posted May 14th, 2020 in costs, news, part 36 offers, personal injuries by sally

‘The High Court has cut a costs award to a seriously injured claimant because exaggeration was “built into the structure” of the way the claim was presented before and during the trial.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 13th May 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

What Does Happen When a CFA Ends Before the Claim for Damages Ends? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted April 20th, 2020 in appeals, chambers articles, contracts, damages, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘The Appellant (‘Mrs Butler’) entered into a CFA with the Respondent solicitors, (‘Bankside’) in respect of a claim for damages against one company, Metris, for termination of a commercial agency.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 15th April 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Judges call for review of costs rules after QOCS judgment – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted April 17th, 2020 in accidents, appeals, compensation, costs, news, part 36 offers, personal injuries by sally

‘Judges in the Court of Appeal have urged rule-makers to look again at the nuances of qualified one-way costs shifting after a judgment over whether a defendant could set off their costs liability against the claimant.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 16th April 2020

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

High Court judges order indemnity costs over ADR failures – Litigation Futures

‘The courts are getting harder on parties who fail to follow directions to try alternative dispute resolution (ADR), with judges imposing indemnity costs in two cases in recent weeks.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 16th April 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Appeal court urges rethink over set-off in QOCS cases – Litigation Futures

Posted April 14th, 2020 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, news, part 36 offers, set-off by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has urged the Civil Procedure Rule Committee to consider preventing defendants setting off costs in cases covered by qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS).’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 14th April 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Judge upholds acceptance of ‘mistaken’ £0 part 36 offer – Litigation Futures

‘A claimant who issued proceedings after the defendant accepted a part 36 offer for £0 – which he said had been made by mistake – has had his claim struck out for abuse of process.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 7th April 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Court fee can be claimed from defendants despite exemption – Litigation Futures

Posted January 28th, 2020 in civil procedure rules, costs, fees, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘There are “strong public policy grounds” for allowing fee-exempt claimants to claim their court fees from defendants rather than the taxpayer, a judge has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 28th January 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Part 36 offers made exclusive of interest not valid, Court of Appeal rules – Local Government Lawyer

Posted January 21st, 2020 in civil procedure rules, costs, interest, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘It is not possible to make a valid Part 36 offer exclusive of interest either generally or in the context of detailed assessment proceedings, the Court of Appeal has ruled in a case involving a local authority.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 20th January 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Part 36 offers cannot exclude interest to be valid – Litigation Futures

Posted December 20th, 2019 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, interest, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘Part 36 offers which specifically exclude interest are not valid, the Court of Appeal has ruled – but one of the judges said this should be reconsidered.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 19th December 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Part 36 Offers Explained – Becket Chambers

Posted November 20th, 2019 in news, part 36 offers by sally

‘This article explains the key points about Part 36 offers and provides top tips for avoiding common pitfalls.’

Full Story

Becket Chambers, 14th November 2019

Source: becket-chambers.co.uk

CA: Part 36 offer did not contract out of fixed costs – Litigation Futures

Posted November 20th, 2019 in costs, news, part 36 offers, road traffic by sally

‘A defendant who settles a claim that leaves the RTA protocol with a part 36 offer including the usual wording about paying costs on the standard basis is not contracting out of fixed costs, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 19th November 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com