Onay v Brown

Onay v Brown

The 5 September 2008 letter was a valid Part 36 offer solely in relation to liability, entitling the claimant to costs under CPR 36.10(1). The judge erred in his exercise of discretion by failing to recognise the claimant as the successful party and by not having proper regard to the underlying realities of the case.

Parties
Appellant: Onay; Respondent: Brown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court Decision on Costs Order After Settlement of Liability and Contributory Negligence in a Road Traffic Accident
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Costs, Contributory Negligence, Settlement Offers, CPR Part 36

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Onay

Appellant

Brown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court Decision on Costs Order After Settlement of Liability and Contributory Negligence in a Road Traffic Accident

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's 5 September 2008 letter constituted a valid Part 36 offer under the Civil Procedure Rules
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in his discretion in awarding costs to the defendant on the issue of contributory negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The 5 September 2008 letter was a valid Part 36 offer solely in relation to liability, entitling the claimant to costs under CPR 36.10(1). The judge erred in his exercise of discretion by failing to recognise the claimant as the successful party and by not having proper regard to the underlying realities of the case.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Costs order set aside; claimant entitled to costs under CPR 36.10(1) as a result of acceptance of valid Part 36 offer.