Lyons v Fox Williams LLP

Lyons v Fox Williams LLP

Despite the defendant losing on some discrete issues, the claimant was wholly unsuccessful on the main issues and recovered nothing. The issues lost by the defendant were not sufficiently significant to justify an issue-based costs order. The refusal of the settlement offer was not unreasonable to a high degree, so indemnity costs were not justified. No further orders were warranted regarding accepted Part 36 offers. An interim payment of £500,000 on account of costs was appropriate. The defendant was awarded £10,000 for the costs of the set aside application.

Parties
Claimant: Cathal Anthony Lyons; Defendant: Fox Williams LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil (professional Negligence) / Costs Ruling After Trial Judgment
Outcome
Costs awarded to the defendant; no indemnity costs; interim payment ordered; costs of set aside application awarded to defendant.
Legal Topics
Costs, Issue Based Costs Orders, Indemnity Costs, Part 36 Offers, Interim Payments
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Costs Issue Based Costs Orders Indemnity Costs Part 36 Offers Interim Payments

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cathal Anthony Lyons

Claimant

Fox Williams LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (professional Negligence) / Costs Ruling After Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the general rule that costs follow the event should be departed from due to partial success or conduct
  2. 2 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded due to refusal of a settlement offer
  3. 3 Whether further orders should be made regarding accepted Part 36 offers

Ratio Decidendi

Despite the defendant losing on some discrete issues, the claimant was wholly unsuccessful on the main issues and recovered nothing. The issues lost by the defendant were not sufficiently significant to justify an issue-based costs order. The refusal of the settlement offer was not unreasonable to a high degree, so indemnity costs were not justified. No further orders were warranted regarding accepted Part 36 offers. An interim payment of £500,000 on account of costs was appropriate. The defendant was awarded £10,000 for the costs of the set aside application.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the defendant; no indemnity costs; interim payment ordered; costs of set aside application awarded to defendant.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs of the action, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.
  • Claimant to make an interim payment of £500,000 on account of costs.