Optical Express Ltd & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] EWHC 2707 (QB) (03 November 2017)

Optical Express Ltd & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] EWHC 2707 (QB) (03 November 2017)

It would be unjust to make the normal costs orders under CPR 36.13(5) due to the claimants' unreasonable delay in providing information on special damages, which delayed the defendant's Part 36 offer. The claimants are entitled to their costs up to 11 January 2016 and the costs of preparing and serving the Further...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2707
Parties
Claimant: Optical Express Limited; Claimant: Optical Express (Gyle) Limited; Claimant: The Frame Zone Limited; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation/malicious Falsehood / Post Settlement Costs Determination After Acceptance of Part 36 Offer
Outcome
Costs orders varied from default; partial costs to claimants, indemnity costs to defendant post-offer, set-off of costs between parties, no set-off against damages.
Legal Topics
Costs Consequences of Part 36 Offers, Libel Damages, Malicious Falsehood, Assessment of Costs, Set Off of Costs, Indemnity Costs
Civil Procedure Defamation Media Law Costs Consequences of Part 36 Offers Libel Damages Malicious Falsehood Assessment of Costs Set Off of Costs +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Optical Express Limited

Claimant

Optical Express (Gyle) Limited

Claimant

The Frame Zone Limited

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation/malicious Falsehood / Post Settlement Costs Determination After Acceptance of Part 36 Offer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the default costs consequences under CPR 36.13(5) should be displaced upon late acceptance of a Part 36 offer
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is entitled to indemnity costs for the post-offer period
  3. 3 Whether costs should be set off against damages

Ratio Decidendi

It would be unjust to make the normal costs orders under CPR 36.13(5) due to the claimants' unreasonable delay in providing information on special damages, which delayed the defendant's Part 36 offer. The claimants are entitled to their costs up to 11 January 2016 and the costs of preparing and serving the Further Information of 8 May 2016. The defendant is entitled to its costs from 12 January 2016, assessed on the standard basis until 17 June 2016 and on the indemnity basis thereafter. Costs are to be set off against each other, but not against damages.

Court Disposition

Costs orders varied from default; partial costs to claimants, indemnity costs to defendant post-offer, set-off of costs between parties, no set-off against damages.

Orders

  • Claimants recover costs up to 11 January 2016 and costs of preparing and serving Further Information of 8 May 2016, assessed on standard basis if not agreed.
  • Defendant recovers costs from 12 January 2016, assessed on standard basis until 17 June 2016 and on indemnity basis thereafter.