Andrew Arentsen calls for consistency in the application of Pt 36
Clarity and consistency are cornerstones of an efficient civil justice system. In no area of practice is this more important than Pt 36. The past two years have seen considerable uncertainty, but it is hoped that recent case law and pending rule changes might bring order to one of the most crucial areas of civil procedure.
Uncertainty developed with Carver v BAA [2008] EWCA Civ 412, [2008] 3 All ER 911. The Court of Appeal held that the claimant had not achieved a more “advantageous” judgment and “no reasonable litigant would have embarked upon this campaign for a gain of £51”.
There was further confusion when the court gave judgment in Medway Primary Care Trust and Dr Ashiq Hussain v Sebastian Marcus [2011] EWCA Civ 750, [2011] All ER (D) 219 (Jun). Sir Anthony May gave the lead judgment. Lord Justice Tomlinson concurred and Lord Justice Jackson dissented.
Diagnosis failure
The arteries in the claimant’s leg became blocked. He attended defendant one’s GP on 6 April 2005.
