Razaq v Iqbal & Ors [2019] EWHC 3924 (QB) (18 November 2019)

Razaq v Iqbal & Ors [2019] EWHC 3924 (QB) (18 November 2019)

The appeal was dismissed because the judge at first instance was entitled to find that, even if the solicitor's conduct was negligent, it was not shown on the balance of probabilities that the Claimant would have accepted the settlement offer if it had been communicated, and thus no wasted costs were caused by the negligence.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3924
Parties
Claimant: Mohammed Saqib Razaq; First Defendant: Imran Iqbal; Second Defendant/appellant: Esure Services Limited; Third Party/respondent: Dunne & Co. Solicitors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Order Refusing Wasted Costs and Granting Relief From Sanctions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Wasted Costs Orders, Relief From Sanctions, Solicitor's Duties, Causation of Costs, Fundamental Dishonesty
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Costs Wasted Costs Orders Relief From Sanctions Solicitor's Duties Causation of Costs Fundamental Dishonesty

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammed Saqib Razaq

Claimant

Imran Iqbal

First Defendant

Esure Services Limited

Second Defendant/appellant

Dunne & Co. Solicitors

Third Party/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Order Refusing Wasted Costs and Granting Relief From Sanctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure by solicitor to communicate a settlement offer to client was a breach of duty to the court justifying a wasted costs order
  2. 2 Whether such failure caused wasted costs to be incurred by the applicant
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanctions should have been granted for late service of evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the judge at first instance was entitled to find that, even if the solicitor's conduct was negligent, it was not shown on the balance of probabilities that the Claimant would have accepted the settlement offer if it had been communicated, and thus no wasted costs were caused by the negligence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal relief from sanctions refused
  • Appeal against refusal of wasted costs order dismissed