Birley & Anor v Heritage Independent Living Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 44 (28 January 2025)

Birley & Anor v Heritage Independent Living Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 44 (28 January 2025)

The claimants' conduct, though procedurally lax, did not amount to abuse of process justifying strike out or disapplication of QOCS. The claim was properly characterised as a personal injury claim, and QOCS applied. There was no legal bar to the simultaneous applicability of QOCS and the costs recovery regime for media/privacy claims as it stood prior to April 2019. The costs order below was within the judge's discretion.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 44
Parties
Claimants/respondents: Nathaniel Birley and Virginier Bell (Personal Representatives of the Estate of Ms Rosa Taylor); Defendant/appellant: Heritage Independent Living Ltd; Additional Party: Angel Risk Management; Additional Party: AXA XL Insurance Company UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (qocs), Abuse of Process, Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa), After the Event (ate) Insurance, Pre Action Protocols, Costs Orders, Personal Injury Claims, Misuse of Private Information, Breach of Confidence
Civil Procedure Data Protection Privacy Law Personal Injury Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (qocs) Abuse of Process Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa) After the Event (ate) Insurance +5 more

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathaniel Birley and Virginier Bell (Personal Representatives of the Estate of Ms Rosa Taylor)

Claimants/respondents

Heritage Independent Living Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Angel Risk Management

Additional Party

AXA XL Insurance Company UK Ltd

Additional Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether QOCS applies to a personal injury claim involving privacy/media causes of action
  2. 2 Whether conduct of claimants' solicitors amounted to abuse of process justifying strike out and disapplication of QOCS
  3. 3 Whether the court had jurisdiction to award costs of the action after late service of claim form

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' conduct, though procedurally lax, did not amount to abuse of process justifying strike out or disapplication of QOCS. The claim was properly characterised as a personal injury claim, and QOCS applied. There was no legal bar to the simultaneous applicability of QOCS and the costs recovery regime for media/privacy claims as it stood prior to April 2019. The costs order below was within the judge's discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Insurers (Angel Risk Management and AXA XL Insurance Company UK Ltd) joined as parties under CPR r19.2(2)(b)
  • Costs orders below stand, with QOCS protection for claimants