header-logo header-logo

Court of Appeal slams lower court for failing to control small claim

11 December 2008
Issue: 7349 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

Amanda Wadey looks at how a £2,000 claim ended up costing £100,000

The Court of Appeal has come down hard on a judge who allowed a small claim to be transferred to the multi-track on the basis of a spurious counterclaim. On the small claims track solicitors’ costs are not normally recoverable, unlike on the multi-track.
 

Facts of the case
 

Mr Peakman brought proceedings against Linbrooke Services to recover £2,232.40. Linbrooke contested the claim, making a basic counterclaim in response to the claim and a more substantial counterclaim which it valued in the region of £30,000 to £40,000. As a consequence of the more substantial counterclaim the matter was allocated to the multi-track.
On the first day of the trial, Mr Peakman argued that the substantial counterclaim should be struck out on the basis that it had no chance of success. However, Linbrooke persisted with it, despite there being no evidence to substantiate it, and was given latitude by

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll