Costs—Order for costs—Discretion

Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Ramsey, 24 Jul 2013

The principle in para 72(vii) of Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd [2008] All ER (D) 04 (Oct) (Multiplex), namely that “if (a) one party makes an offer under Pt 36 or an admissible offer within r 44.3(4)(c) which is nearly but not quite sufficient, and (b) the other party rejects that offer outright without any attempt to negotiate, then it might be appropriate to penalise the second party in costs” no longer applies to CPR Pt 36 and should not be applied as a special “near miss” rule through CPR 44.2(4)(c). If there was an unreasonable refusal to negotiate then that was a matter which came within the circumstances which the court could take into account under CPR 44.2(4) and sub-para (a) in particular. 

Judith Jackson QC (instructed by Thomas Eggar LLP) for claimant. Nicholas