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

Woodings v British Telecommunications Plc, City of London County Court, 25 March 2003

25 March 2003
The issues

Costs – small claim – allocation – acoustics shock

The facts

A group of Claimants brought actions in respect of an alleged acoustic shock, which had been caused by the equipment provided to them by the Defendant. (Loud, shrill noise through the apparatus worn). All the claims were settled shortly after the Defence, for damages ranging between £500.00 and £750.00. They had not been allocated to any track at the time of settlement. The Claimants sought costs generally and the Defendant argued that these were claims that would have been allocated to the Small Claims Track and that recovery of costs should be limited accordingly.

The decision

1. On allocation, bearing in mind that liability had not been admitted, it is likely that the Court would have ordered a joint Trial on the issue of liability and allocation to the Multi Track on the grounds of the technical nature of the claim and the evidence required.

2. Expense could have been spared if the Defendants had dealt with the claims in a more rational manner.

3. The Defendants having acted unreasonably should pay costs on the standard basis pursuant to CPR 27.14 (2)(d) (the power in respect of matters allocated to the Small Claims Track for the Court to Order further costs beyond those permitted by the Track to be paid by a party who had behaved unreasonably). NB it was conceded by the Claimant that where a case settled before allocation, if it would ordinarily have been allocated to the Small Claims Track then the successful Claimant’s claim for costs should be limited accordingly)

focus on...

Legal updates

Contingent loss in negligence claims

Contingent loss is relevant to limitation; specifically, the date at which a claimant’s cause of action accrues for the purposes of a claim in the tort of negligence (as many claims against professional advisers are framed).

View

Legal updates

Legal and regulatory monthly update - September 2019

The latest update covering delegated authority, insurance product development, the senior insurance managers regime, data protection, operational control frameworks, Lloyds market, and horizon scanning.

View

Legal updates

Kuoni referred to the CJEU by Supreme Court for clarification - possible impact on breach of contract, vicarious liability and assumption of responsibility claims for sexual abuse and assault

We were hoping to be able to give you some interesting insights following the judgment of X v Kuoni Travel Ltd but that will have to wait for another day.

View

Legal updates

The disappearance of LIBOR

Companies should undertake a comprehensive review and audit to identify those products and legacy contracts that are LIBOR-linked and carry out an in-depth risk assessment of discontinuation. Where possible, companies should look at appointing an individual to oversee the programme.

View

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