Costs
Shah and another v Shah and another [2021] EWHC 1668 (QB), [2021] All ER (D) 102 (Jun)
Where the appellants had rejected the respondents’ Pt 36 offer of £1 in respect of county court proceedings, concerning a family dispute, and where the county court judge had awarded the respondents nominal damages of £10 on their claim, having found that the appellants had breached an agreement between the parties, the Queen’s Bench Division (the court) held that the judge had not erred in making a costs order in favour of the respondents, having found that they were the successful parties, that the purposes of Pt 36 had properly been served and that there had been a genuine basis offered for avoiding litigation. The court held that the judge had taken decisions that had been open to him and that he had not erred in principle or in law.
Damages
Steve Hill Ltd v Witham (as widow and executrix of the estate of Neil Witham (deceased)) [2021] EWCA Civ 1312, [2021]
