Personal Injury Publications

3PB Publications

In his latest article, Ikeni Mbako-Allison examines Hislop v Perde [2018] EWCA Civ 1726 and the cost consequences of accepting a Part 36 offer late in former RTA and EL/PL Protocol Claims.

View Publication

Cost Consequences of Accepting a Part 36 Offer late in former RTA and ELPL Protocol Claims – Problems with Hislop v Perde [2018] EWCA Civ 1726

In the joined cases of Hislop v Perde and Kaur v Committee (for the time being) of Ramgarhia Board Leicester [2018] EWCA Civ 1726, the Court of Appeal considered the question of the correct approach to costs in cases falling under the fixed costs regime in CPR Part 45 Section IIIA where a Part 36 offer is accepted after the expiry of the relevant period.

Section IIIA is the part of Part 45 which applies to cases no longer proceeding under the RTA and EL/PL Protocol (‘PAP’) such as those proceeding to Fast Track trial. The Court also provided a useful steer on the previously uncanvassed ‘exceptional circumstances’ test under CP45.29J, which provides a general gateway out of the fixed costs regime, and the test for indemnity costs, (see paragraphs 8 to 13 below).

Ikeni Mbako-Allison writes about the Court Of Appeal's approach.

View Publication

In a recent judgment in the Employment Appeal Tribunal – Hampshire County Council v Wyatt UKEAT/0013/16 (13 October 2016) – Mrs Justice Simler DBE gave important presidential guidance on the questions which frequently arise in discrimination remedy hearings when tribunals consider claims for non-pecuniary damages and/or where there might be competing causes of injury. Karen Moss

View Publication

Sharan Sanghera examines the Court's decision finding that two claimants were precluded by the ex turpi causa principle from recovering damages in Joseph Thomas Beaumont & Lewis O'Neill v David Ferrer [2016] EWHC Civ 768.

View Publication

Emma Waldron provides a brief update on the latest development in respect of costs of MOJ Portal drop out "disposal hearings" and considers the potential impact of the case which has been given permission to appeal Bird v Acorn Group Limited

View Publication