Yentob v MGN Ltd
The judge was entitled to find it would be unjust to apply the normal costs consequences under CPR 36.17 due to MGN’s limited and late admissions, the uncertainty about whether MGN would have agreed to a joint statement in open court, and the lack of full disclosure until trial. The judge applied the correct legal test and considered all relevant circumstances.
- Parties
- Respondent: Alan Yentob; Appellant: MGN Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 17 December 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (costs Order)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal granted but no error of law found.
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Part 36 Offers, Misuse of Private Information, Judicial Discretion
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alan Yentob
Respondent
MGN Limited
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (costs Order)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judge erred in holding that Mr Yentob should not suffer the normal consequences of not accepting a Part 36 offer under CPR 36.17
Ratio Decidendi
The judge was entitled to find it would be unjust to apply the normal costs consequences under CPR 36.17 due to MGN’s limited and late admissions, the uncertainty about whether MGN would have agreed to a joint statement in open court, and the lack of full disclosure until trial. The judge applied the correct legal test and considered all relevant circumstances.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal granted but no error of law found.
Orders
- No order as to costs from the expiry of the relevant period under the Part 36 offer; each side to bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment