Rosemary Chapman v Mid and South Essex NHS
[2023] EWHC 1871 (KB)
Christopher Bell v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
21 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 650 (KB)
High Court
A man sued the police for failing to prevent his son's abduction. He won and made a good offer to settle early, but the police didn't accept it. The judge gave the man extra money for the police wasting his time and causing extra stress. The police had to pay all the man's legal costs and a large extra amount of money as a punishment.
Key Facts
- •Claimant brought claims under the Human Rights Act 1998 for breach of Article 8 ECHR and negligence due to the abduction of his son by his former partner.
- •Claimant made two Part 36 offers before trial (£95,000 and £50,000).
- •Defendant failed to engage meaningfully in settlement discussions.
- •Claimant was awarded £137,999.49 in damages in Bell (No. 1).
- •This judgment addresses consequential matters, including costs and interest, following the successful Part 36 offer.
Legal Principles
CPR 36.17(1)(b) dictates costs consequences when a claimant obtains judgment at least as advantageous as their Part 36 offer.
CPR 36.17(1)(b)
CPR 36.17(4) outlines the court's obligation to order enhanced interest, indemnity costs, and an additional sum unless unjust.
CPR 36.17(4)
OMV Petrom SA v. Glencore International AG [2017] EWCA Civ 195 provides guidance on enhanced interest considerations, emphasizing proportionality and incentivizing reasonable settlement.
OMV Petrom SA v. Glencore International AG [2017] EWCA Civ 195
There is no special rule for public authorities in civil litigation.
R (on the application of Hysaj) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 1633
Wisniewski v Central Manchester Health Authority [1998] EWCA Civ 596 principles regarding adverse inferences from absent evidence were applied.
Wisniewski v Central Manchester Health Authority [1998] EWCA Civ 596
Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 and Al-Kandari v JR Brown & Co [1988] 1 QB 665 principles of negligent misstatement were relevant to the case.
Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 and Al-Kandari v JR Brown & Co [1988] 1 QB 665
Outcomes
Enhanced interest at 10% above base rate on £104,399.48 of damages awarded from 19 September 2019 (£54,675.58).
Defendant's conduct of litigation, including destruction of documents and failure to engage in settlement, justified the maximum enhanced interest rate.
An additional sum of £10,439.95 awarded under CPR 36.17(4)(d).
Defendant did not oppose this application, which was calculated as 10% of the relevant damages.
Claimant awarded costs on an indemnity basis from 19 September 2019, with enhanced interest at 10% above base rate.
Defendant's conduct of litigation justified indemnity costs; the late disclosure of a portion of the claim did not render the award unjust.
Payment on account of 90% of Claimant's budgeted costs (£235,951.02 plus VAT).
Common practice and justified given indemnity costs; Claimant’s actual costs likely exceeded the budget.
Similar Cases
Ineos Upstream Limited & Ors v Joseph Boyd & Anor
[2023] EWHC 1756 (Ch)
Old Park Capital Maestro Fund Limited v Old Park Capital Limited (in liquidation)
[2023] EWHC 3057 (Ch)
PHILLIP SMOUT v WULFRUN HOTELS LIMITED
[2023] EWHC 1128 (KB)
Chedington Events Limited v Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake & Anor (Quantum trial consequential orders)
[2024] EWHC 11 (Ch)