Huck v Robson [2001] EWCA Civ 1425 (2 October 2001)

Huck v Robson [2001] EWCA Civ 1425 (2 October 2001)

The judge was entitled to exercise discretion and refuse indemnity costs where the Part 36 offer was not a genuine attempt to settle, particularly in cases of unquantified damages and unrealistic liability percentages.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1425
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Rosalind Huck; Defendant/respondent: Tony Robert Robson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Renewed Oral Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Costs, Part 36 Offers, Indemnity Costs, Discretion of Judge
Civil Procedure Costs Part 36 Offers Indemnity Costs Discretion of Judge

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rosalind Huck

Claimant/applicant

Tony Robert Robson

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Renewed Oral Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing to order indemnity costs under Part 36.21 when the claimant's Part 36 offer was not accepted and the claimant obtained a more advantageous result
  2. 2 Whether the Part 36 offer was a genuine attempt to settle

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to exercise discretion and refuse indemnity costs where the Part 36 offer was not a genuine attempt to settle, particularly in cases of unquantified damages and unrealistic liability percentages.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Appeal to be listed before three Lord Justices with a time estimate of half a day excluding judgment
  • Costs in the appeal