Phillimore v Hewson

Phillimore v Hewson

The County Court judge erred in reviving the first claim beyond the scope of the Tomlin order, which only permitted revival for enforcing the scheduled terms. Allegations T to V, not covered by the Tomlin order, should proceed in the second claim. The judge's reduction of the costs award was within discretion, but the sum awarded should reflect half the defendant's costs as announced.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Sarah Phillimore; Defendant/appellant: Barbara Hewson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Tomlin Orders, Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Costs, Striking Out, Appeal Procedure
Civil Procedure Harassment Tomlin Orders Protection From Harassment Act 1997 Costs Striking Out Appeal Procedure

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarah Phillimore

Claimant/respondent

Barbara Hewson

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the County Court judge erred in lifting the stay on the first claim settled by Tomlin order without an application
  2. 2 Whether allegations T to V should proceed
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in awarding only half costs to the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The County Court judge erred in reviving the first claim beyond the scope of the Tomlin order, which only permitted revival for enforcing the scheduled terms. Allegations T to V, not covered by the Tomlin order, should proceed in the second claim. The judge's reduction of the costs award was within discretion, but the sum awarded should reflect half the defendant's costs as announced.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The judge's order is varied so that the second claim is struck out save for allegations T to V.
  • The claimant is to pay half of the defendant's costs below.