header-logo header-logo

23 September 2009 / Dominic Regan
Categories: Legal News , Costs , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Sometimes they come back

A little known Court of Appeal decision six years ago has come back to haunt personal injury practitioners.

In Voice and Script International Ltd v Alghafar [2003] All ER (D) 86 (May) the claimant sued for the value of goods lent to the defendant which were never returned. The goods were worth less than the £5,000 small claims limit which applies to non-injury claims. The action went to trial and the claimant won. For some unknown reason the case had not been allocated to the small claims track .The trial judge awarded costs since the case was outside the small claims regime. He was reversed on appeal; a small claim is a small claim even though not formally recognised or tracked as such. The concept of proportionality meant it was absurd to give costs which are not recoverable in small claims unless there is unreasonable conduct; CPR 27(14).

This principle has now been applied to a claim brought on behalf of a minor which settled for £250. No costs were recoverable held HH Judge Stewart QC in Coles v Keklik (unreported) on 30 June 2008 Liverpool County Court. He cited and applied the VOICE decision. Given the derisory settlement figure what could this be but a small claim?

In Aurangzeb v Walker [2008] EWHC 90134, Master Rogers decided on 22 January 2009 that no costs were recoverable after C accepted an offer in the sum of £500. The infant claimant was hurt in a taxi. The court approved the settlement as reasonable but denied costs to the claimant as a result of the reasoning in Coles.

As a final warning please note that the approval of an infant settlement by the Court does not preclude a later negligence action against lawyers for allegedly settling at an under-value; see Griffin v Kingsmill [2001] All ER (D) 66 (Jun). (Dominic Regan)
 

Categories: Legal News , Costs , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

back-to-top-scroll