0370 270 6000

Gaynor v Blackpool Football Club Limited, Oldham County Court

7 June 2002
The issues

Indemnity costs – Part 36 Offer – Civil Procedure Rules Part 44

The facts

Claimant succeeded at trial with no finding of contributory negligence. Claimant had made 2 Part 36 Offers, the first to accept 100% liability on the part of the Defendant and the second 75% liability on the part of the Defendant. The Claimant sought indemnity costs under Part 36 failing which indemnity costs under Part 44 on the basis it was unreasonable for the Defendant to continue to defend the action.

The decision

1. Claimant had not succeeded in beating its first 100% offer. He had not achieved a Judgment which was for more than or more advantageous to him than that offer.

2. He was not entitled to rely under Part 36 until expiry of the period for acceptance of the second offer.

3. This was a case where competing cases rested on conflicting evidence. That those issues would be resolved in favour of the Claimant was not inevitable. This was not a case where indemnity costs under Part 44 were appropriate.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up