Gulati & OrS v MGN Ltd [2015] EWHC 1805 (Ch) (24 June 2015)

Gulati & OrS v MGN Ltd [2015] EWHC 1805 (Ch) (24 June 2015)

Neither the procedural conduct of the defendant nor the failure to accept the claimants' settlement offers (one withdrawn Part 36, one Calderbank) amounted to unreasonable conduct sufficient to justify indemnity costs. The claimants' offers, not being effective Part 36 offers at the relevant time, did not attract the special costs consequences, and the cumulative conduct of the defendant was not sufficiently out of the norm.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1805 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Ms Frost; Claimant: Mr Ashworth; Defendant: MGN Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in Civil Litigation / Post Trial, Costs Determination
Outcome
Applications for indemnity costs by Ms Frost and Mr Ashworth dismissed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Indemnity Costs, Part 36 Offers, Calderbank Offers, Unreasonable Conduct
Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Part 36 Offers Calderbank Offers Unreasonable Conduct

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Frost

Claimant

Mr Ashworth

Claimant

MGN Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Application in Civil Litigation / Post Trial, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Ms Frost and Mr Ashworth should be awarded indemnity costs from the date their settlement offers ought to have been accepted.

Ratio Decidendi

Neither the procedural conduct of the defendant nor the failure to accept the claimants' settlement offers (one withdrawn Part 36, one Calderbank) amounted to unreasonable conduct sufficient to justify indemnity costs. The claimants' offers, not being effective Part 36 offers at the relevant time, did not attract the special costs consequences, and the cumulative conduct of the defendant was not sufficiently out of the norm.

Court Disposition

Applications for indemnity costs by Ms Frost and Mr Ashworth dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimants to receive costs on the standard basis; indemnity costs refused.