Hullock v East Riding of Yorkshire County Council [2009] EWCA Civ 1039 (14 July 2009)

Hullock v East Riding of Yorkshire County Council [2009] EWCA Civ 1039 (14 July 2009)

Where a claimant exaggerates the quantum of a personal injury claim and the real dispute is over the exaggerated element, the defendant is the real winner for costs purposes. The claimant should only recover costs up to the point of an interim payment reflecting the uncontested damages, and should pay the defendant's costs thereafter. The trial judge erred in awarding the claimant 50% of her costs; the correct order is for the defendant to pay the claimant's costs up to the interim payment, and the claimant to pay the defendant's costs thereafter.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 1039
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Mary Hullock; Appellant/defendant: East Riding of Yorkshire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) Costs Only / Court of Appeal Judgment on Costs Order Following Settlement of Personal Injury Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Costs, Exaggeration of Claim, Part 36 Offers, Contributory Negligence, Quantum of Damages
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Costs Exaggeration of Claim Part 36 Offers Contributory Negligence Quantum of Damages

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Hullock

Respondent/claimant

East Riding of Yorkshire County Council

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) Costs Only / Court of Appeal Judgment on Costs Order Following Settlement of Personal Injury Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is the successful party for the purpose of costs where the claimant exaggerates the quantum of a personal injury claim?
  2. 2 What is the effect of an interim payment versus a Part 36 offer on costs liability?
  3. 3 How should the court exercise its discretion under CPR 44.3 in light of exaggerated claims?

Ratio Decidendi

Where a claimant exaggerates the quantum of a personal injury claim and the real dispute is over the exaggerated element, the defendant is the real winner for costs purposes. The claimant should only recover costs up to the point of an interim payment reflecting the uncontested damages, and should pay the defendant's costs thereafter. The trial judge erred in awarding the claimant 50% of her costs; the correct order is for the defendant to pay the claimant's costs up to the interim payment, and the claimant to pay the defendant's costs thereafter.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant's costs up to 13 April 2006 (date of interim payment)
  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs thereafter