In a number of recent cases the courts have penalised a “successful” but dishonest party with a punitive costs order
In a number of recent cases the courts have penalised a “successful” but dishonest party with a punitive costs order. CPR 44.3(2) provides the starting point. The general rule is that the successful party gets an order for his costs to be paid by the losing party, but it provides the court “may” make a different order. CPR 44.3(4) provides for certain matters that “must” be taken into account. These include the parties’ conduct and whether an offer to settle under Pt 36 or otherwise has been made.
In Straker v Tudor Rose [2007] EWCA Civ 368, [2007] All ER (D) 224 (Apr) Waller LJ agreed with Longmore LJ in Barnes v Time Talk UK Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 402 at para [28] that, particularly in a commercial context, where the claim is for money, in deciding who is the successful party “the most important
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
