Hall and others v Stone: CA 18 Dec 2007

The claimants appealed against a reduction in their costs awards after succeeding in their claims arising from road traffic incidents. The judge had awarded them only 60% of their costs and they appealed submitting that there was no reason why they should not get 100%.
Held: The appeal succeeded. It was the defendant insurers allegations of fraud which had inevitably lead to the cases being allocated to the multitrack with the increased costs. The judge had found the claims to be innocently inflated, but not dishonest. The first two claimants had won on the main issue fought out over four days as to whether the claims were dishonest and they beat any offer that had ever been made. It was unfair to allocate full responsibility for the allocation to the mutitrack to the claimants.
Waller LJ VP, Smith LJ, Lloyd LJ
[2007] EWCA Civ 1354
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 44.3
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedDevine v Franklin QBD 2002
. .
CitedPainting v University of Oxford CA 3-Feb-2005
The claimant had sought damages for personal injuries, namely injury to her back. Though she was found to have exaggerated her claim, she still recovered more than had been paid in. The defendant appealed a costs order based solely on the size of . .

Cited by:
CitedWidlake v BAA Ltd CA 23-Nov-2009
The claimant had succeeded in her action for personal injuries, but now appealed against the awarding of costs to the defendant. The dispute had been substantialy as to the nature and effect of her injuries. She had not disclosed earlier injury to . .
CitedGregson v Hussein, CIS Insurance CA 9-Feb-2010
gregson_husseinCA2010
The claimant appealed against the level of costs awarded to him in succeeding in his claim for damages for personal injury following a road traffic accident. The court had found that though the claimant had succeeded, the substantial dispute had . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 February 2021; Ref: scu.262878