Find Out More

  • Accreditations
  • Join our Team
  • Terms of Business
  • Pricing Information
  • Client Feedback
    • Leave a Review
  • Complaints
  • Regulatory Information
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Skip to footer navigation
  • Skip to secondary navigation

Harold Stock & Co. Solicitors

Rooted in the community

  • Mossley:
    01457 835597
  • Failsworth:
    0161 682 2400
  • Stockport:
    0161 456 5012
  • Get In Touch
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Team
    • CSR
  • Legal Services
    • Personal Injury
    • Medical Negligence
    • Serious Injury
    • Commercial and Company
    • Family Law
    • Property
    • Wills, Probate And The Elderly
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • More

NHS Health Trust denied costs after settling ‘whole’ claim in clinical negligence case

17th March 2016 by Harold Stock & Co

The High Court in in ABC v Barts Health NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 500 (QB) has rejected a defendant’s attempt to avoid paying costs in a case settled for less than was originally claimed.

In the clinical negligence case Barts Health NHS Trust, maintained that the claimant had forfeited their right to part 36 provisions, having rejected an offer to settle in June 2015.

The claimant, had claimed for more than £1m plus annual payments of £230,000 after treatment at Whipps Cross Hospital in 2003 in which the claimant suffered a stroke which prevented a scheduled transplant. Barts Health NHS Trust admitted a breach of duty early on in the case, however, causation issues related to the stroke remained in dispute.

In February 2016, two weeks before the trial of action was due to start, the claimant accepted the defendant’s part 36 offer of £50,000: which, the offer was expressed to be to settle of the ‘whole’ the claimant’s claim.

The claimant argued in a hearing this month that part 36 provisions meant that they were entitled to costs up to June 2015. The defendant, said Tees Law, had not protected its part 36 costs by framing the offer to take account of that. The defendant claimed that as the majority of the claim was unsuccessful, this would be ‘unjust’ because if the Claimant had simply submitted the small claim, none of the expert witnesses would have been required and costs would have been significantly reduced.

His Honour Judge McKenna accepted that whilst the claimant may have ‘acted unreasonably’, part 36 already offers a remedy to cater for that situation:

“It is common ground that Part 36 is a separate, self-contained code and must be applied as such as Lord Justice Ward put it in Shovelar v Lane[2012] 1 WLR 637. Moreover, the court’s discretion to depart from the usual order is constrained by the precondition that its full enforcement would be unjust. It follows – it seems to me – that the discretion is more circumscribed than the broad discretion under CPR 44.2.”

“Moreover, the specific considerations identified in CPR 36.17(5) have this common feature that they focus analysis on the circumstances of the making of the offer, the provision or otherwise of the relevant information in relation to it rather than more general issues as to conduct although I remind myself that the requirement to take into account all the circumstances does enable the court to take a broader view and to consider the various matters relied upon by the Defendant.”

“The defendant had the means and opportunity to protect itself in respect of the costs that it was going to have to incur in respect of the causation issue, but chose for whatever reason when making its part 36 offer to frame the offer as a settlement of the whole claim and then subsequently when that offer was not accepted did not make any revised offer excluding causation,” he added

The defendant was ordered to pay the claimant’s costs up to June 2015, with the claimant paying the defendant’s costs from June 2015.

Filed Under: Medical Neglience

Harold Stock & Co

Related

5 Surprising facts about pain
5th February 2021
Categories: Medical Neglience, Personal Injury
Harold Stock & Co show their pedal power for Road Safety Week
20th November 2018
Categories: Blog, Medical Neglience, News
FB
Who’s Watching You?
6th March 2017
Categories: Litigation, Medical Neglience, News, Personal Injury

Footer

  • Accreditations
  • Join our Team
  • Terms of Business
  • Pricing Information
  • Client Feedback
    • Leave a Review
  • Complaints
  • Regulatory Information
  • Acceptable Use
  • Complaints
  • Email Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy/Cookies
  • Regulatory Information
  • Terms of Website Use
harold stock solicitors

Mossley (Head Office)

55-57 Stamford Street
Mossley
Tameside OL5 0LN

Tel: 01457 835597
Fax: 0330 024 9210

harold stock solicitors

Failsworth

Ivy Business Centre
Crown Street
Failsworth M35 9PB

Tel: 0161 682 2400
Fax: 0330 024 9210

harold stock solicitors

Stockport

Pepper House
1 Pepper Road
Stockport SK7 5DP

Tel: 0161 456 5012
Fax: 0330 024 9210

Email: info@haroldstock.com

Harold Stock & Co Solicitors is a trading name of Harold Stock & Co Limited, a Limited Company registered in England and Wales. Company No: 07201476. Registered Office: 55-57 Stamford Street, Mossley, Tameside, OL5 0LN. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (535629). VAT No: 991 015 916 A full list of Directors is available at the Company’s Registered Office.

  • Acceptable Use
  • Complaints
  • Email Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy/Cookies
  • Regulatory Information
  • Terms of Website Use

Company Registered in England and Wales. No. 07201476
Copyright © 2023
Log in
Instilled Ltd

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.Accept
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT