Jamera v Le Feuvre [2020] JRC 154 (03 August 2020)

Jamera v Le Feuvre [2020] JRC 154 (03 August 2020)

The plaintiff is entitled to recover 70% of the costs of the application to replace the expert and 70% of the costs of the hearing, both on the standard basis, as the main issue was decided in the plaintiff's favour and there was no unjustified delay. The plaintiff must pay the defendant's wasted costs related to the original expert, also on the standard basis, due to the plaintiff's solicitors' and the expert's failings, but not to the level justifying indemnity costs.

Citation
[2020] JRC 154
Parties
Plaintiff: Jamera; Defendant: Le Feuvre
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
03 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Costs Judgment Following Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Costs order in favour of the plaintiff for 70% of the application and hearing costs on the standard basis; wasted costs to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on the standard basis; plaintiff not to recover costs associated with obtaining the original expert's evidence.
Legal Topics
Costs, Expert Evidence, Wasted Costs, Replacement of Expert Witness
Civil Procedure Costs Expert Evidence Wasted Costs Replacement of Expert Witness

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jamera

Plaintiff

Le Feuvre

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Costs Judgment Following Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff should recover costs of the hearing after being permitted to rely on an alternative orthopaedic expert
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff should pay wasted costs to the defendant for work done on the original expert's evidence
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff should recover costs associated with obtaining the original expert's evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is entitled to recover 70% of the costs of the application to replace the expert and 70% of the costs of the hearing, both on the standard basis, as the main issue was decided in the plaintiff's favour and there was no unjustified delay. The plaintiff must pay the defendant's wasted costs related to the original expert, also on the standard basis, due to the plaintiff's solicitors' and the expert's failings, but not to the level justifying indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of the plaintiff for 70% of the application and hearing costs on the standard basis; wasted costs to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on the standard basis; plaintiff not to recover costs associated with obtaining the original expert's evidence.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to recover 70% of the costs of the application to replace Mr Jasani on the standard basis.
  • Plaintiff to recover 70% of the costs of the hearing leading to this judgment on the standard basis.