Tuson v Murphy

Tuson v Murphy

Where a defendant makes an unconditional Part 36 offer with knowledge of the claimant's material non-disclosure, it is not unjust to apply the default costs rule under CPR 36.13(5), and the claimant should not be deprived of pre-offer costs unless subsequent events undermine the defendant's assessment at the time of the offer.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Anna Louise Tuson; Respondent/defendant: Debbie Murphy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order After Acceptance of Part 36 Offer
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Costs, Part 36 Offers, Non Disclosure, Dishonesty, 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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anna Louise Tuson

Appellant/claimant

Debbie Murphy

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order After Acceptance of Part 36 Offer

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in depriving the claimant of pre-offer costs due to non-disclosure and alleged dishonesty when the defendant made an unconditional Part 36 offer with knowledge of the non-disclosure.
  2. 2 Whether it was 'unjust' under CPR 36.13(6) to apply the normal costs consequences after late acceptance of a Part 36 offer.

Ratio Decidendi

Where a defendant makes an unconditional Part 36 offer with knowledge of the claimant's material non-disclosure, it is not unjust to apply the default costs rule under CPR 36.13(5), and the claimant should not be deprived of pre-offer costs unless subsequent events undermine the defendant's assessment at the time of the offer.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant's costs up to 8 October 2015.
  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs from 8 October 2015 to 1 December 2015.