There is no default entitlement to indemnity costs for the claimant where a defendant has unsuccessfully suggested the claim is fundamentally dishonest, the Court of Appeal has held
In Thakkar and others v Mican 2 Axa Insurance UK Plc [2024] EWCA Civ 552, a ‘relatively straightforward road traffic accident case’, Lord Justice Coulson held the trial judge was correct to refuse indemnity costs. Coulson LJ said ‘there was no principle of law that she had failed to follow or apply’.
Agreeing with Coulson LJ’s judgment, the Lady Chief Justice, Lady Carr, said: ‘This litigation has been characterised by parties on both sides far too ready to throw unnecessary and serious allegations against each other… As the courts have made clear repeatedly, an unnecessarily aggressive approach to litigation is unacceptable…
‘Potential costs incentives are not a good reason for making unwarranted allegations of misconduct, let alone dishonesty. The unfortunate effect of the parties’ conduct was to increase not only aggravation to an independent witness but also costs on both sides.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
