Fleming v Sussex Police Force [2004] EWCA Civ 643 (04 May 2004)

Fleming v Sussex Police Force [2004] EWCA Civ 643 (04 May 2004)

Although the judge erred in considering the effect of costs on the claimant's damages and the jury's expectations, there was no discrete issue that significantly increased trial length or costs, and the judge was entitled to exercise his discretion to award full costs to the claimant. The appeal court would not interfere with the judge's assessment.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 643
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Dudley Fleming; Defendant/appellant: The Chief Constable of the Sussex Police Force
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Brighton County Court Judgment on Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Assault, Malicious Prosecution, False Imprisonment, Misfeasance in Public Office
Civil Procedure Tort Law Costs Orders Assault Malicious Prosecution False Imprisonment Misfeasance in Public Office

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dudley Fleming

Claimant/respondent

The Chief Constable of the Sussex Police Force

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Brighton County Court Judgment on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in awarding the claimant full costs despite partial success
  2. 2 Whether the judge misapplied CPR Rule 44.3 by considering the effect of costs on the claimant's damages
  3. 3 Whether an issues-based or percentage costs order should have been made

Ratio Decidendi

Although the judge erred in considering the effect of costs on the claimant's damages and the jury's expectations, there was no discrete issue that significantly increased trial length or costs, and the judge was entitled to exercise his discretion to award full costs to the claimant. The appeal court would not interfere with the judge's assessment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant's costs of the appeal, excluding costs of and in relation to the letters of 15 September, 17 September and 26 November, such costs to be payable on the standard basis and subject to detailed assessment