Neave v Neave

Neave v Neave

The claimant's Part 36 offers were valid and the judgment was more advantageous to her than the offers. The judge failed to apply CPR 36.21, and it was not unjust to make the order. The claimant is entitled to indemnity costs from the relevant date.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mrs Margaret Neave; Respondent/defendant: Mr Hugh Neave
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order After Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Costs, Part 36 Offers, Conversion, Trespass, Indemnity Costs
Civil Procedure Family Law Costs Part 36 Offers Conversion Trespass Indemnity Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Margaret Neave

Appellant/claimant

Mr Hugh Neave

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order After Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's Part 36 offers complied with CPR requirements
  2. 2 Whether the judgment was more advantageous to the claimant than the Part 36 offer
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in failing to apply CPR 36.21 to costs

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's Part 36 offers were valid and the judgment was more advantageous to her than the offers. The judge failed to apply CPR 36.21, and it was not unjust to make the order. The claimant is entitled to indemnity costs from the relevant date.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Claimant awarded costs on indemnity basis from 17 May 2001.
  • Interest on costs at 4% above base rate.