No ‘issue-based’ order as to costs

Verrechia v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (CA TLR 10 May) (see also p65-66)

The claimant sought damages of £141,500 plus aggravated and exemplary damages under the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 in respect of 65 items which the police had failed to return to him. The claimant had offered to settle for £98,000 which was followed by a payment into court by the police of the sum of £5,500 in full settlement of the whole of the claimant’s claim. The judge awarded damages in the sum of £37,300 plus interest with the result that neither party succeeded to the extent of their prior offers. The judge clearly thought the action had resulted in a ‘draw’. Although when the case started there were some 65 items, by the time of closing speeches, there were only 40 items in issue. The appellant won in respect of half in number of these items. There were no criticisms relevant to costs in the conduct of either party. The appellant had won one half of his case and lost on the rest. The police as well as the appellant had come to court to win that part of the case in which they succeeded. To this extent the judge is entitled to take the view that each side was to that extent the winner. Alternatively, it was open to the judge, in the light of the wide powers conferred by the CPR, to conclude that, in any event, the appellant should only have part of his costs as he had been successful in part only of his case, and that the police should have the cost of the part of the case on which they had been successful. On either basis the judge could properly conclude that the proportion of costs which each party should receive was 50% and that the net result was nil when these two percentages were set against each other.