Dockerill & Healey v Tullett, Macefield v Bakos and Tubridy v Sarwar (2012)
Dockerill & Healey v Tullett, Macefield v Bakos and Tubridy v Sarwar (2012)
Court of Appeal
Lord Justice Patten
Date: 24/02/2012
The Issues: These were three appeals concerning the costs of proceedings to obtain Court approval on settlements involving minors. Three issues arose:
- Where damages are under £1,000.00
1. Are costs to be calculated in accordance with the fixed costs regime under CPR 45 Part II or are they subject to a process of detailed assessment in accordance with CPR 44.5?
- Where damages are under £1,000.00
2. If detailed assessment was the appropriate regime then how should costs be assessed, bearing in mind that damages did not exceed £1,000 and the claim would usually have been allocated to the small claims track (had it not involved a minor).
- Where damages are over £1,000.000
3. In one of the cases (Tubridy) damages were agreed at £2,100.00 and it was accepted that the matter would fall within the predictive cost regime. The dispute however was over whether Counsel’s brief fee could be recovered under CPR 45.10 (2) (c), - was it ‘necessarily incurred’ due to the claimant being a minor?
Caselaw Sign In
If you're new here, this will guide you through creating an account. If you're already a member, simply enter your existing credentials to log in.
