Site icon swarb.co.uk

Johnsey Estates and Limited v Secretary of State for Environment: CA 11 Apr 2001

Chadwick LJ: ‘The principles applicable in the present case may, I think, be summarised as follows: (i) costs cannot be recovered except under an order of the court; (ii) the question whether to make any order as to costs – and, if so, what order – is a matter entrusted to the discretion of the trial judge; (iii) the starting point for the exercise of discretion is that costs should follow the event; nevertheless, (iv) the judge may make different orders for costs in relation to discrete issues – and, in particular, should consider doing so where a party has been successful on one issue but unsuccessful on another issue and, in that event, may make an order for costs against the party who has been generally successful in the litigation; and (v) the judge may deprive a party of costs on an issue on which he has been successful if satisfied that the party has acted unreasonably in relation to that issue; (vi) an appellate court should not interfere with the judge’s exercise of discretion merely because it takes the view that it would have exercised that discretion differently.’

Judges:

Chadwick LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 535

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFactortame Ltd and others v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions) CA 28-Jan-2002
A part 36 offer had been made and declined. A significant amendment was made to the defendant’s pleadings on the basis of information which had always been available to him. The claimant then accepted the payment in. Should the claimant be regarded . .
CitedKastor Navigation Co Ltd and Another v AGF M A T and others ComC 17-Mar-2003
The court was able to make costs orders which differentiated between different stages and elements of a case. This might well result, as here, in a situation of a succesful claimant being ordered to pay 80% of the defendant’s costs, because of costs . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others ChD 23-Jan-2004
. .
CitedDay v Day CA 14-Mar-2006
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147514

Exit mobile version