header-logo header-logo

29 May 2008 / Dr M Friston P Hughes Prof A Mcgee , M Smith
Issue: 7323 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

Costs Law Brief

Carver v BAA Plc [2008] EWCA Civ 412, [2008] All ER (D) 295 (Apr)

DISPUTES OF PRINCIPLE

There has always been a problem when a party to litigation has refused to accept a “without prejudice save as to costs” offer made by the other side but narrowly beats it at a contested hearing. Arguments about the effect of CPR 36 or (if the offer is made in detailed assessment proceedings) CPR 47.18 and 19 follow, usually with each side claiming entitlement to the costs.
Naturally, the offeree will argue that the rules should be strict and that to exceed the offer even by a narrow margin justifies proceeding to court. The offeror will argue that the margin by which the offer has been beaten is plainly a waste of the (often very significant) costs expended to achieve that result. The resolution of such a dispute of principle is of huge significance.
The answer recently delivered by the

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll