header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Costs—Order for costs—Discretion

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
23 June 2011
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Hammersmatch Properties (Welwyn) Ltd v Saint-Gobain Ceramics and Plastics Ltd and another [2013] EWHC 2227 (TCC), [2013] All ER (D) 303 (Jul)

Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Ramsey, 24 Jul 2013

The principle in para 72(vii) of Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd [2008] All ER (D) 04 (Oct) (Multiplex), namely that “if (a) one party makes an offer under Pt 36 or an admissible offer within r 44.3(4)(c) which is nearly but not quite sufficient, and (b) the other party rejects that offer outright without any attempt to negotiate, then it might be appropriate to penalise the second party in costs” no longer applies to CPR Pt 36 and should not be applied as a special “near miss” rule through CPR 44.2(4)(c). If there was an unreasonable refusal to negotiate then that was a matter which came within the circumstances which the court could take into account under CPR 44.2(4) and sub-para (a) in particular. 

Judith Jackson QC (instructed by Thomas Eggar LLP) for claimant. Nicholas

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Read All
Public Accounts Committee warn of ‘extinction’ risk for legal aid
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
NLJ this week: The insider returns
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll