Low value PI claims
Broadhurst v Tan  EWCA Civ 94
Counsel: For the first appellant and second respondent: Benjamin Williams QCFor the second appellant and first respondent: James LaughlandSolicitors: For the first appellant and second respondent: Winn Solicitors LtdFor the second appellant and first respondent: Horwich Farrelly
Following some confusion arising from a point of construction, the Court of Appeal has ruled that in fixed costs personal
injury claims governed by CPR Pt 45 sIIIA, costs were payable on the indemnity basis under CPR r36.14 when a claimant made
a Pt 36 offer and obtained judgment which was more advantageous than the offer. Since r36.14(3) had not been modified by r36.14A,
it continued to have full force and effect. Fixed costs were not to be equated with indemnity costs and any tension between
r45.29B and r36.14A therefore had to be resolved in favour of r36.14A.
The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online
If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.