header-logo header-logo

Part 36: fixed or not fixed?

11 December 2019 / Matthew Hoe
Issue: 7868 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail
13018
Matthew Hoe provides some clarity over the latest Part 36 conundrum on fixed costs

Lai Ho v Adelekun [2019] EWCA Civ 1988 is the latest—alas, unsuccessful—attempt to get out of fixed costs in a personal injury claim. The Court of Appeal held, back in 2011, that it was possible in principle for parties to contract out of fixed costs. In Adelekun, the Court of Appeal considered specific circumstances in which the parties disagreed on whether they had contracted out of fixed costs under CPR 45 Section IIIA, which covers low value claims that have left the RTA or EL/PL (employers’ liability and public liability) Protocols or fall under the Package Travel Claims Protocol. On the facts, the court held that the parties had not contracted out of fixed costs, but the judgment contains salutary dicta for the future settlement of such claims.

The claim settled by way of Part 36, and the appeal turned on the wording of the offer. The defendant made the offer, using probably template

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll