Low-value infant claims have always been contentious due to inconsistency within the rules. If a claim for less than £1,000 was issued in the normal manner, it would be allocated to the small-claims track and fixed costs would apply. However, if damages were agreed pre-issue and proceedings were issued to obtain approval only, then the case would be allocated to the multitrack and standard basis costs would apply. These differing approaches can lead to disproportionate costs being recovered.
This problem now appears to have been dealt with in the Court of Appeal (CoA) decision of Dockerill and Healey v Tullett and Macefield v Bakos and Tubridy v Sarwar [2012] EWCA Civ 184.
Where an infant claimant recovers less than £1,000 the court will allow fixed costs only, and not standard basis costs. It may allow additional amounts for any work that is necessary because the claimant is a minor, but this will usually be limited to a fee for advice on the merits of the claim. When dealing with fixed recoverable costs cases counsel’s fee for advocacy will not be allowed.
This entry was posted in Costs and tagged CoA, Costs, Counsel's Fees, Dockerill v Tullett [2012], infant claims, Low Value, Small Claims. Bookmark the permalink.