header-logo header-logo

Settling infant costs

17 February 2011 / Lisa Wright
Issue: 7453 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

In the first of two articles, Lisa Wright reports on the costs dilemmas in infant approvals

CPR Pt 21 applies to all types of claims, not merely road traffic accidents or personal injury cases. It is clear from the commentary that accompanies CPR 21.10 that a settlement, compromise or payment is not confined to cases where the infant is a claimant but equally applies where the infant is a defendant.

The litigation procedure can take many different paths which in turn affects the issue of costs. If liability and quantum is disputed, any approval will follow a successful result at trial. Proceedings will be issued pursuant to Pt 7 and costs are likely to be summarily assessed following the conclusion of the trial and infant approval hearing. Where liability has been agreed on a split liability basis but quantum remains an issue, as per Simon Brown LJ in Drinkall v Whitwood [2003] All ER (D) 76 (Nov), proceedings will be issued pursuant to Pt 7 for the court’s approval to be obtained for the split

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll