BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Partridge & Ors v Lawrence & Ors [2003] EWCA Civ 1122 (08 July 2003)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/1122.html
Cite as: [2003] EWCA Civ 1122

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]


Neutral Citation Number: [2003] EWCA Civ 1122
B2/2002/2312

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE BRISTOL COUNTY COURT
(Mr Recorder Barnes)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2
8th July 2003

B e f o r e :

LORD JUSTICE PETER GIBSON
LORD JUSTICE CLARKE
LORD JUSTICE DYSON

____________________

PARTRIDGE AND OTHERS Claimants/Applicants
-v-
LAWRENCE & OTHERS Defendants/Respondents

____________________

(Computer-Aided Transcript of the Palantype Notes of
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

____________________

MR JEREMY CALLMAN (instructed by Sharpe Pritchard Solicitors, London WC1V 6HG) appeared on behalf of the Appellants
MR PETER HARRISON (instructed by Lansdowne Solicitors, London N5 2UT) appeared on behalf of the Respondents
Tuesday, 8th July 2003
C O S T S

____________________

HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT
____________________

Crown Copyright ©

    1. LORD JUSTICE PETER GIBSON: We are now asked to determine who should bear the costs of this litigation. We have been shown correspondence which indicates that at a comparatively early stage the defendants made a very reasonable offer which, in the light of the outcome of this litigation, conforms with the decision of this court, that is to say that the width of the field access was only 5.5 metres. Had that offer been accepted it would have brought an end to the litigation, because that would have dealt with the other main issue dealing with the pre-conditions.

  1. Our attention has been drawn to the fact that very late in the day on 24th June 2003 mediation was offered by the claimants. The fact that the claimants, for their own reasons, wished to involve the solicitors who had previously acted for them, Battens, does not really to our minds affect the matter as between the claimants and the defendants. We are entitled in awarding costs to have regard to the conduct of the parties and how reasonably they have behaved.
  2. Having regard to all that has been urged on us by both sides, we are of the view that the appropriate order to be made is one which gives to the defendants, successful as they were on what was the important and main issue in the litigation, that is to say the width of the field access, the preponderance of their costs. We direct that 85 percent of the defendants' costs should be paid by the claimants here and below.
  3. 4. Order: As above.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/1122.html