AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd. [2012] EWHC 2224 (QB) (31 July 2012)

AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd. [2012] EWHC 2224 (QB) (31 July 2012)

The claimant succeeded on only one part of her claim and failed on the majority, including the main issue of paternity. The damages awarded exceeded the defendant's offer, but the defendant succeeded on substantial parts of the claim. The conduct of the claimant's solicitors, particularly regarding the siege...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 2224
Parties
Claimant: AAA; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (privacy, Costs) / Post Trial Costs Judgment
Outcome
Claimant ordered to pay 80% of defendant's costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Privacy, Costs, Injunctions, Damages, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Privacy Law Media Law Civil Procedure Breach of Privacy Costs Injunctions Damages Article 8 ECHR +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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AAA

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (privacy, Costs) / Post Trial Costs Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to costs after partial success in a privacy claim
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is entitled to costs given the claimant's failure on most issues
  3. 3 How the conduct of the parties, especially the claimant's solicitors, affects the costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant succeeded on only one part of her claim and failed on the majority, including the main issue of paternity. The damages awarded exceeded the defendant's offer, but the defendant succeeded on substantial parts of the claim. The conduct of the claimant's solicitors, particularly regarding the siege allegation and witness evidence, further justified a significant costs order against the claimant. Therefore, the claimant is ordered to pay 80% of the defendant's costs.

Court Disposition

Claimant ordered to pay 80% of defendant's costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay 80% of defendant's total costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.