Waring v McDonnell (2018)
Waring v McDonnell (2018)
The Issues
The Claimant and Defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge Lane, Keymer, West Sussex, when they collided head-on. Both sustained personal injury and both pursued claims for damages for personal injury.
The Defendant asserted that should his case fail, he was protected by Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”) and any order for costs made against him could not be enforced by the Claimant.
The Claimant submitted that the proper interpretation to be given to the word “proceedings” within the context and purpose of CPR 44.13 is that it encompasses the Claimant’s claim against the Defendant, but not the Defendant’s defence of the Claimant’s claim.
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.
