Box Legal Logo

Box Legal Logo
Home > ATE Caselaw > West (Executor of the Estate of the late Kenneth Morriss) v Burton (2021)

West (Executor of the Estate of the late Kenneth Morriss) v Burton (2021)

West (Executor of the Estate of the late Kenneth Morriss) v Burton (2021)


The Background

On 8th April 2016, Kenneth Morriss was involved in a road traffic accident with Peter Burton.  Mr Morriss instructed solicitors, who submitted his claim via the Portal to Mr Burton’s insurers.

Liability was not admitted and as per the protocol, the matter ‘exited’ the Portal on 8th July 2016.  On 14th July 2016, Mr Morriss died.  His death was not connected to the accident.

Medical experts were subsequently instructed and a report provided to the insurer.   A Part 36 offer was made by the insurer to  ‘Mr Kenneth Morriss’, to settle the claim in the sum of £1,375.00 plus costs.  Proceedings had not been issued at this point.

Solicitors accepted the insurers offer on the same day.  In the meantime, the probate of the estate had been granted to Mr and Mrs Anthony West, on 20th March 2019.  This Grant was subsequently provided to the insurers.

Once the offer was accepted, a dispute arose as to whether costs should be calculated under of Part 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules.  It is usually the case that costs calculated under section II, Part 45, are greater.


The Issues

The case was initially heard by on 3rd December 2019 in the Liverpool County Court, where it was held that the Claimant’s argument, that the costs should be dealt with under Section II of Part 45 CPR, was correct.  He accepted the argument that the claim which was settled was that of West as executor, not the claim initially notified by Morriss.  He ordered that fixed recoverable costs and disbursements were payable to the Claimant.

In October 2020, Judge Graham Wood QC dismissed the defendant’s appeal, with costs awarded to the Claimant.

The Defendant continued to argue that because of the non-admission of liability, the claim no longer continued to be under the protocol and it thereafter could not re-enter it. The claimant submitted that whilst Morriss had started a claim by his issue of the CNF via the portal, that was not the claim which was the subject of the settlement




Please sign in to have access to the full report.

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.


< Back to case list




We use cookies to improve your experience of our website. Click here to read more.