Ferri v Gill [2019] EWHC 952 (QB) (17 April 2019)

Ferri v Gill [2019] EWHC 952 (QB) (17 April 2019)

The Master erred in law by applying a 'low bar' to the test for exceptional circumstances under CPR 45.29J and by using the wrong comparator basket of cases. The correct approach requires a strict construction of 'exceptional circumstances', measured against cases that have exited the Protocol and are subject to Section IIIA. Only circumstances that are truly out of the ordinary for such cases justify departure from the fixed costs regime.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 952
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Mr Carl Ferri; Defendant/appellant: Mr Ian Gill
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Senior Courts Costs Office / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Fixed Recoverable Costs, Exceptional Circumstances, Personal Injury, CPR 45.29 J, RTA Protocol
Civil Procedure Costs Fixed Recoverable Costs Exceptional Circumstances Personal Injury CPR 45.29 J RTA Protocol

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

Parties

Mr Carl Ferri

Claimant/respondent

Mr Ian Gill

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Senior Courts Costs Office / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct legal test for 'exceptional circumstances' under CPR 45.29J for escaping fixed recoverable costs in ex-Protocol personal injury claims?
  2. 2 Did the Master err in law by applying a 'low bar' to exceptionality and using the wrong comparator basket of cases?

Ratio Decidendi

The Master erred in law by applying a 'low bar' to the test for exceptional circumstances under CPR 45.29J and by using the wrong comparator basket of cases. The correct approach requires a strict construction of 'exceptional circumstances', measured against cases that have exited the Protocol and are subject to Section IIIA. Only circumstances that are truly out of the ordinary for such cases justify departure from the fixed costs regime.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Issue raised in preliminary point 3 remitted to Senior Courts Costs Office for reconsideration before a different Master
  • No permission to appeal on factual grounds; factual arguments to be made on remittal