Dutton & Ors v Minards & Ors
The judge was entitled to find that, due to the uncertainty of the net value of the claim and the lack of a formulated counterclaim at the time of the Defendants' offer, it was not unjust to apply the default costs order under CPR Part 36.10(5). The judge's exercise of discretion was within the ambit of his authority and there was no basis for appellate interference.
- Parties
- Claimants: Dutton & Ors; Defendants: Minards & Ors
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 16 July 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Costs Order Following Late Acceptance of Part 36 Offer
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Part 36 Offers, Settlement, Judicial Discretion
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dutton & Ors
Claimants
Minards & Ors
Defendants
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Costs Order Following Late Acceptance of Part 36 Offer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judge erred in applying the default costs order under CPR Part 36.10(5) after late acceptance of a Part 36 offer
- 2 Whether the Defendants' offer of 30 July 2010 was a valid Part 36 offer
- 3 Whether it was unjust to apply the default costs order in the circumstances
Ratio Decidendi
The judge was entitled to find that, due to the uncertainty of the net value of the claim and the lack of a formulated counterclaim at the time of the Defendants' offer, it was not unjust to apply the default costs order under CPR Part 36.10(5). The judge's exercise of discretion was within the ambit of his authority and there was no basis for appellate interference.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The order of the lower court as to costs stands.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment