Costs in a housing disrepair case: ‘The question which we have to consider arises where, on receipt of that notification, the landlord promptly carries out the repairs. If he does, that will remove from the tenant’s claim in the court action subsequently brought any application for specific performance of the repairing covenant, but will, very often, leave outstanding in that action only a claim for consequential damages. It may often be the case that if the landlord had not carried out the repairs, and thus the tenant had sued for specific performance as well as for consequential damages, the effect of the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’) would have been that the action was allocated to the fast track. By contrast, if the action is for the consequential damages alone, because the repairs have now been done, the action will very often fall to be allocated to the small claims track. The issue for us is this: what if any order ought to be made in such a case as to pre-allocation costs? In particular, ought some order to be made which reflects the fact that until the repairs were carried out the tenant’s claim (notified under the protocol) was for specific performance as well as for damages, and would potentially have been for allocation to the fast track ?’
Judges:
Thomas, Hughes, Rimer LJJ
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Civ 891, [2009] HLR 15, [2008] CP Rep 43
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Crook and others QBD 19-Jun-2007
Irwin J considered the enforceability of a conditional fee agreement in a test series of housing disrepair cases, recorded that he had been told that this Council almost always lost such claims brought against them, and had evidence about the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Costs, Housing
Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271285
