21 October 2011 / Dominic Regan

Issue: 7486 / Categories: Opinion , Costs

printer

mail-detail

Upside down?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Dominic Regan visits the case of the winner who lost to the loser who won

Typically, in a given dispute there will ultimately be a winner and a loser. Sadly, the Court of Appeal has just demonstrated that it cannot tell which is which, in the case of Medway Primary Care Trust v Marcus [2011] EWCA Civ 750, [2011] All ER (D) 219 (Jun). Not only does the decision show how intractable costs issues have become, it also gives one an inkling of how horrific things will become for claimants if legal aid were removed from clinical negligence claims, a measure which Lord Justice Jackson does not support.

Inevitable amputation?

Mr Marcus, aged 31, had to have his leg amputated. He blamed two doctors whom he had previously consulted. By the time he was admitted to hospital the position was irretrievable and the leg was lost. Quantum was agreed at £525,000 but liability was not. As so often is alleged in these matters,

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

Upside down?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Dominic Regan visits the case of the winner who lost to the loser who won

Typically, in a given dispute there will ultimately be a winner and a loser. Sadly, the Court of Appeal has just demonstrated that it cannot tell which is which, in the case of Medway Primary Care Trust v Marcus [2011] EWCA Civ 750, [2011] All ER (D) 219 (Jun). Not only does the decision show how intractable costs issues have become, it also gives one an inkling of how horrific things will become for claimants if legal aid were removed from clinical negligence claims, a measure which Lord Justice Jackson does not support.

Inevitable amputation?

Mr Marcus, aged 31, had to have his leg amputated. He blamed two doctors whom he had previously consulted. By the time he was admitted to hospital the position was irretrievable and the leg was lost. Quantum was agreed at £525,000 but liability was not. As so often is alleged in these matters,

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS

NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders

Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners

NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do

A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent

Your magistrates’ court needs you!

Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process

NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed

Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’

NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits

A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’

back-to-top-scroll