Dearling v Foregate Developments (Chester) Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 913 (09 June 2003)

Dearling v Foregate Developments (Chester) Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 913 (09 June 2003)

Where substantive proceedings are resolved by commercial settlement without trial and the court cannot assess merits, the default position is no order as to costs after the last offer, absent good reason. The judge erred in awarding costs for the entire action; costs should be limited to the period up to the defendant's Part 36 offer.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 913
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Keith Murray Dearling; Defendant/appellant: Foregate Developments (Chester) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Costs Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Settlement, Contractual Defects
Civil Procedure Contract Law Costs Alternative Dispute Resolution Settlement Contractual Defects

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 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keith Murray Dearling

Claimant/respondent

Foregate Developments (Chester) Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Entitlement to costs following settlement without trial
  2. 2 Allocation of ADR costs
  3. 3 Effect of Part 36 offers on costs liability

Ratio Decidendi

Where substantive proceedings are resolved by commercial settlement without trial and the court cannot assess merits, the default position is no order as to costs after the last offer, absent good reason. The judge erred in awarding costs for the entire action; costs should be limited to the period up to the defendant's Part 36 offer.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant's costs up to 3 June 2002 (date for accepting 13 May 2002 offer)
  • No order as to costs thereafter