Yentob v MGN Ltd

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Yentob

Respondent

MGN Limited

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (costs Order)

  1. 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.