Murphy v Countryside In Partnership With Hunters Plc [2007] EWCA Civ 221 (31 January 2007)

Murphy v Countryside In Partnership With Hunters Plc [2007] EWCA Civ 221 (31 January 2007)

The criticisms made by the trial judge of Countryside's conduct were not justified individually or collectively and did not warrant a departure from the normal rule that the successful party should have its costs. The judge's decision to make no order as to costs was therefore wrong in principle and should be set aside.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 221
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Murphy; Defendant/appellant: Countryside in Partnership with Hunters PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment on Costs Following Dismissal of Negligence Claim
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Costs, Negligence, Multi Track Litigation, Discretion in Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Tort Costs Negligence Multi Track Litigation Discretion in Costs Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Murphy

Claimant/respondent

Countryside in Partnership with Hunters PLC

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment on Costs Following Dismissal of Negligence Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in principle by making no order for costs in favour of the successful defendant after dismissing the claimant's negligence claim

Ratio Decidendi

The criticisms made by the trial judge of Countryside's conduct were not justified individually or collectively and did not warrant a departure from the normal rule that the successful party should have its costs. The judge's decision to make no order as to costs was therefore wrong in principle and should be set aside.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for costs in favour of Countryside in the court below