Practice

The claimant made an application that payment into court “be increased as the claimant’s further particulars of loss have been updated and the claimant’s claim has now increased”. The court held that it was important that such procedural applications were kept to a minimum, particularly where the overall costs of the case could well overtop either what was claimed or at the very least what was ultimately recovered. A litigant should not make repeated applications for financial relief under CPR 3.1 or under CPR 25.7 just because he or she had obtained more evidence of them than had been deployed on an earlier application, particularly where such evidence could have been obtained for the purposes of that earlier application.