header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
23 June 2011
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs—Order for costs—Discretion

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Hammersmatch Properties (Welwyn) Ltd v Saint-Gobain Ceramics and Plastics Ltd and another [2013] EWHC 2227 (TCC), [2013] All ER (D) 303 (Jul)

Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Ramsey, 24 Jul 2013

The principle in para 72(vii) of Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd [2008] All ER (D) 04 (Oct) (Multiplex), namely that “if (a) one party makes an offer under Pt 36 or an admissible offer within r 44.3(4)(c) which is nearly but not quite sufficient, and (b) the other party rejects that offer outright without any attempt to negotiate, then it might be appropriate to penalise the second party in costs” no longer applies to CPR Pt 36 and should not be applied as a special “near miss” rule through CPR 44.2(4)(c). If there was an unreasonable refusal to negotiate then that was a matter which came within the circumstances which the court could take into account under CPR 44.2(4) and sub-para (a) in particular. 

Judith Jackson QC (instructed by Thomas Eggar LLP) for claimant. Nicholas Dowding QC & Elizabeth Fitzgerald (instructed by Shulmans

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS
Read All
Legal notice: Notice under the Trustee Act 1925

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Emergency lawyers on call as international regulatory actions soar
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll