header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 July 2010 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7427 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Winning at what cost?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Karen O’Sullivan on the lessons to be learned from two important appeals

Where are we now when it comes to costs awards following Pt 36 offers, especially those that are almost or only just beaten? The Court of Appeal re-visited Carver v BAA [2008] EWCA Civ 412, [2008] All ER (D) 295 for the first time, in two appeals heard together: Gibbon v Manchester City Council and LG Blower v Reeves [2010] EWCA Civ 726, [2010] All ER (D) 218 (Jun).
Although still binding, Carver did not come out of the judgment well. Only Gibbon was a personal injury claim but both cases have useful lessons to teach us.

Part 36 means what it says: follow the rules

Although CPR Pt 36 is an entirely optional method of resolving disputes, it is a self-contained code that must be followed if parties want the benefits it confers. While it draws plenty of inspiration from common law contract rules, it does not incorporate those rules.

The Court of Appeal said you should not have to

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
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
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’ 
NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll