header-logo header-logo

29 January 2016
Issue: 7684 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs

Crooks v Hendricks Lovell Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 8, [2016] All ER (D) 100 (Jan)

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order as to costs made against the appellant in circumstances where he had beaten the offer to settle for “£18,500 net of [Compensation Recovery Unit]” that had been made to him by the respondent pursuant to CPR Pt 36. The offer had been a valid one under Pt 36, the recorder had been entitled to wait to assess costs until after the Compensation Recovery Unit had reviewed the appellant’s certificate of recoverable benefits and, on the facts, the recorder had erred in concluding that the appellant had not beaten the offer.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP strengthens Commercial practice with a new partner

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons welcomes Francesca Brown to Family team

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau strengthens Sheffield regulatory practice with new hires

NEWS
A wide-ranging Civil Way column highlights developments from insolvency procedure to employment law, but one case stands out for its lessons on bankruptcy, family homes and digital communications
A sprawling Intellectual Property Office battle between House of Fraser and Frasers Property has delivered a masterclass in modern trade mark law
Courts in England and Wales and Singapore are increasingly confronting complex disputes over international child relocation as families become more globally mobile
The government’s long-awaited family law reform consultation could mark a turning point for domestic abuse victims navigating financial remedy proceedings, but significant challenges remain
A new commercial court pilot giving the public access to documents used in hearings, including expert reports, is raising difficult questions about transparency and privacy
back-to-top-scroll