Aurangzeb v Walker [2008] EWHC 90134 (Costs)

Posted on Thursday, January 22nd, 2009

The Claimant was a minor, injured in a minor road accident on 28/08/07. The matter settled by way of parental indemnity for the sum of £500.

The Defendant contended that although proceedings had not been issued and the matter was not allocated to a track, if the matter had been allocated, it would have been to the small claims track. The Defendant relied on, inter alia, Michael Coles v Sedat Keklik, in that where Part 8 proceedings were not issued for approval, the matter should be dealt with as if it was on the small claims track.

The Claimant’s Solicitors submitted that there was an entitlement to predictive costs and that as the Claimant was a minor, small claims costs could not apply.

Master Rodgers referred to Michael Coles v Sedat Keklik and held that the Claimant’s costs should be those allowable on the small claims track. Master Rodgers found that even if the procedure had been correctly followed in this case and Infant Approval proceedings had been issued, the District Judge would have ordered the Claimant’s costs to be assessed on the standard basis, therefore limiting the costs to those allowed under the small claims track.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Costs/2009/90134.html

Bookmark and Share

Sign
Up

Receive our news and updates
Enter your email address below to subscribe
Contact us
Tel: 01228 819131 Fax: 01228 501810 Dx: 63314 Penrith Email: info@paramountlegalcosts.co.uk

We have used Paramount for several years. They provide a thorough, efficient and reliable service and they are easy to communicate with.

© 2015 Paramount Legal Costs Limited