Pertemps Group Ltd v Needham & Needham Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 390 (15 March 2001)

Pertemps Group Ltd v Needham & Needham Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 390 (15 March 2001)

The judge was entitled to conclude that, given the late and minimal Part 36 offer and the conduct of both parties, there was no substantive winner or loser, and the appropriate order was for each party to bear its own costs.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 390
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Pertemps Group Limited; Defendant/respondent: Needham & Needham Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (costs Order)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Costs, Part 36 Offers, Exercise of Judicial Discretion, Small Claims, Multi Track Procedure
Civil Procedure Costs Part 36 Offers Exercise of Judicial Discretion Small Claims Multi Track Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pertemps Group Limited

Claimant/applicant

Needham & Needham Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (costs Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in exercising discretion regarding costs after acceptance of a late Part 36 offer
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were entitled to costs given the small sum awarded

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to conclude that, given the late and minimal Part 36 offer and the conduct of both parties, there was no substantive winner or loser, and the appropriate order was for each party to bear its own costs.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Each party to bear its own costs