Cashman v Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust

Cashman v Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust

The Master erred by relying on the degree of reduction in the costs claimed as rendering it unjust to make an award under CPR 36.14(3)(d), contrary to the intent and effect of the rule. The Claimant was entitled to the additional amount as the Part 36 offer was lower than the assessed costs and no relevant circumstances justified refusal.

Parties
Appellant / Claimant: Michael Richard Cashman; Respondent / Defendant: Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
CPR 36.14(3)(d), Detailed Assessment of Costs, Part 36 Offers, Clinical Negligence
Civil Procedure Costs CPR 36.14(3)(d) Detailed Assessment of Costs Part 36 Offers Clinical Negligence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Richard Cashman

Appellant / Claimant

Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was unjust to refuse an additional amount under CPR 36.14(3)(d) in detailed assessment proceedings
  2. 2 Application of CPR 36.14(3)(d) to costs proceedings under pre-amendment CFA regime

Ratio Decidendi

The Master erred by relying on the degree of reduction in the costs claimed as rendering it unjust to make an award under CPR 36.14(3)(d), contrary to the intent and effect of the rule. The Claimant was entitled to the additional amount as the Part 36 offer was lower than the assessed costs and no relevant circumstances justified refusal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Claimant entitled to an additional award calculated in accordance with CPR 36.14(3)(d)