header-logo header-logo

Bullying costs parents

17 October 2009
Issue: 7389 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The High Court has granted a third party costs order against the parents of a man who brought a negligence claim for nearly £1m against his former school for failing to prevent him being bullied.

The High Court has granted a third party costs order against the parents of a man who brought a negligence claim for nearly £1m against his former school for failing to prevent him being bullied.

The case of Thomson v Berkhamsted Collegiate School [2009] EWHC 2374 (QB) concerned a 25-year-old unemployed university graduate who tried to sue the private school, which he attended between 1994 and 2002, for injury, loss and damages. He dropped the case two weeks into the trial. The defendant had incurred estimated costs in excess of £250,000.

Delivering his judgment, Mr Justice Blake said that while this was “a case of family funding”, there was “a quantity of material indicating that the parents were not merely funders but were directly concerned with the facts of the claim, and promoting the remedies that they identified”.

He revisited the principles on third party costs as set out in Dymocks Franchise Systems (NSW) Pty Ltd v Todd [2005] 4 All ER 195.
 

Issue: 7389 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll