0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Giambrone v JMC Holidays, Nelson J

2 July 2002
The issues

Costs – generic letters – indemnity principle.

The facts

This was an exceptional and difficult case involving a group action relating to 652 people who had been food-poisoned at a hotel in Majorca. When it came to Detailed Assessment, certain matters of a preliminary nature were dealt with by the Costs Judge in advance of the Detailed Assessment and with a subject matter of Appeal. Firstly, there was a question as to the allowable sum for generic letters prepared by Paralegals. The letters were repetitive and involved only the pressing of a button on a computer. The Claimant sought a flat sum of £10.00 per letter. The Defendants offered £1.00 per letter. The Costs Judge had indicated that £1.00 was the appropriate rate.

A second issue related to the indemnity principle. The Costs Judge, on the basis of correspondence which he had come across during his reading, had ordered the Claimant to make a witness statement in relation to the indemnity principle. He had further ordered that that statement and the exhibits be disclosed not only to him but to the paying party.

The decision

1. Generic letters – £1.00 per letter was plainly insufficient. £3.30 per letter would be allowed.

2. The Costs Judge was wrong to order disclosure to the paying party. He should have complied with paragraph 40.14 of the Costs Practice Direction and directed Claimant to produce a witness statement and relevant documents to him alone and thereafter he should have put Claimants to their election as to whether to disclose the documents to rely upon their contents or to decline disclosure and rely on witness statements alone.

Focus on...

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.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


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