Jackson v Ministry of Defence

Jackson v Ministry of Defence

The trial judge properly exercised discretion in awarding the claimant 75% of his costs, making a 25% reduction for exaggeration of the claim. The claimant was the successful party, having beaten the payment into court. The judge was correct not to consider confidential settlement discussions, and the reduction in costs was within the judge's discretion.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: James Jackson; Defendant/appellant: Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Decision on Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs, Exaggeration of Claim, Part 36 Payment, Without Prejudice Settlement, Assessment of Damages
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Costs Exaggeration of Claim Part 36 Payment Without Prejudice Settlement Assessment 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Jackson

Claimant/respondent

Ministry of Defence

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in awarding the claimant 75% of his costs despite exaggeration of the claim
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to consider the defendant as the successful party for costs purposes
  3. 3 Whether the judge should have considered offers made at a confidential settlement meeting

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge properly exercised discretion in awarding the claimant 75% of his costs, making a 25% reduction for exaggeration of the claim. The claimant was the successful party, having beaten the payment into court. The judge was correct not to consider confidential settlement discussions, and the reduction in costs was within the judge's discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant's costs of the appeal, subject to detailed assessment as in the High Court in Manchester.