Sarah Robson


Fixed Costs Specialist

Call now on 0800 634 9650

MOJ Portal and Fixed Costs Cases

There are now a number of cases concerning fixed costs on and around the MOJ Portals.

They are subdivided below by topic/theme below.

Where a case establishes more than one point, it may appear more than once in the below index.

Click on the case name for more details and for a link to the judgment.

Learn More

Common Law Principles do not apply

Draper v Newport

(Common Law Mistake does not apply in the Portals)

Kilby v Brown

(Waiver & Affirmation do not apply in the Portals )

Purcell v McGarry

(First Tier Appeal - Offer and Acceptance does not apply in the Portals)

Patel v Fortis

(Non-Portal CPRs do not apply in the Portals)

Individual Heads of Loss

Bewicke-Copley v Ibeh

(Agreed individual heads of loss are binding)

Bushell v Parry

(First Tier Appeal - Agreed individual heads of loss are not binding)

Maddocks v Lyne

(First Tier Appeal - Agreed individual heads of loss are normally binding, entire Portal settlements are binding)

Phillips v Willis [2016] EWCA Civ 401

(Irrational for judge to order case out of Portal, individual heads of loss can be agreed)

SIIIA CPR 45 Fixed costs on leaving the Portal

Hislop v Perde: Kaur v Committee (for the time being) of Ramgarhia Board Leicester [2018] EWCA Civ 1726

(No indemnity costs on late acceptance of a Part 36 where SIIIA applies)

Broadhurst v Tan; Taylor v Smith [2016] EWCA Civ 94

(SIIIA Indemnity costs are hourly rate not fixed)

Qader v Esure Services Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 1109

(Exception to SIIIA costs where allocated to multi-track)

Sharp v Leeds City Council [2017] EWCA Civ 33

(SIIIA fixed costs for interim applications apply even for Pre-Action Disclosure applications)

Bird v Acorn [2016] EWCA Civ 1096

(Re stage of fixed costs)

Chapman v Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

(A court has the power to vary quantum of fixed SIIIA costs for conduct)

Akhtar v Amin & Esure

(Where court ordered SIIIA costs, to be assessed, but SIIIA costs did not apply, the court had the power to order non SIIIA costs)

Petit v MIB & 5 Ors

(Where claim not properly started in the Portal, SIIIA costs did not follow)

Jackson v Barfoot Farms

(Whether agreement to pay costs on the standard basis excluded the award of fixed costs, and whether non-fixed costs could be awarded as the case was exceptional per CPR 45.29J)

Part 36 offers and SIIIA Fixed costs

Cookson v Manchester City Council

(Acceptance of a Part 36 offer removes the court's powers under CPR 45.24 to limit the claimant to Portal costs)

Ansell v AT&T

(Acceptance of a Part 36 offer does not remove the court's powers under CPR 45.24 to limit the claimant to Portal costs)

When CPR 45.24 can be applied

Brown v Ezeugwa

(First Tier Appeal - Fixed costs can be awarded on assessment; not limited to when order for costs made/agreed)

Davies v Greenway

(Appeal to SCCO - Fixed costs can be awarded on assessment and standard basis does not exclude fixed costs)

Williams v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy [2018] EWCA Civ 852

(Where CPR 45.24 could not be used, but the court could get to the same result otherwise)

Leaving the Portals

Patel v Fortis

(Leaving for technical non-compliance only not reasonable)

Modhwadia v Modhwadia

(First Tier Appeal - Failure to explain reason for offer not fatal)

Ilahi v Usman

(First Tier Appeal - CPR 45.24 engaged even when case automatically left, where that departure was caused by an act which the Claimant elected to take)

Doyle v Manchester Audi

(Omission to act causing claim to leave Portal was an election to leave)

Payne v Scott

(Where judge ordered case out of Portal was still Claimant's election to leave)

Uppal v Daudia

(No obligation to make offer in Portal, unreasonable to leave for that, D's Costs awarded on indemnity basis following finding that C acted unreasonably)

Rafiania v All Type Scaffolding Ltd

(No test of reasonableness for total failure to use the Portal)

Monteith v Carroll

(Making a pre-med offer did not justify leaving the Portal)

Hussain v Wardle

(Claim left Portal after Claimant failed to include mandatory information in the CNF)

Bursuc v EUI Ltd

(Not unreasonable to leave Portal Protocol because became too complex, applications to limit C to Portal costs cannot be made until claim concluded)

Cannot use Hindsight or Speculation

Raja v Day & MIB HHJ Gregory, Liverpool CC, 02.03.15

(Cannot take into account would have left the Portal anyway)

Tennant v Cottrell

(Cannot change reason for leaving, nor retrospectively justify reason)

Dawrant v Part & Parcel Network Ltd

(First Tier Appeal - Cannot use hindsight when a case has left the Portal)

Using the Portals

Mulholland v Hughes HHJ Freedman, Newcastle CC, 18.09.15

(First Tier Appeal - Offers in the Portal do not amount to admissions, Claimants have to repay over-payment of damages in non-settlement payment, Arguments at Stage 3 limited by those in Stage 2 pack)

Mozzano v Riwa

(Multiple CNFs - how to deal)

Lamb v Gregory

(Witness statements permitted under the [2010] Protocol)

Raja v Day & MIB HHJ Gregory, Liverpool CC, 02.03.15

(First Tier Appeal - Default position on finding a Portal breach is fixed costs, burden shifts to Claimant to show why should not apply)

Smith v Owen

(Unreasonable exit for non payment of disbursement)

Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd v Yavuz & Ors [2017] EWHC 3088 (QB) (6 Dec 2017)

(Contempt re completion of CNF)

David Grant v Dawn Meats (UK) [2018] EWCA Civ 2212

(Limitation, Stays and Service of a Portal Claim form)

Montreal Convention Claims

Mead v British Airways PLC

(The Portal does not apply to Montreal Convention Claims)

McKendry v British Airways PLC

(The Portal does not apply to Montreal Convention Claims)

Are Portal Admissions binding outside the Portal?

Ullah v Jon

(Portal Admissions are binding outside the Portals)

Malak v Nasim

(Portal Admissions are not binding outside the Portals)

Chimel v Chibwana & Williams

(First Tier Appeal - Portal Admission is binding outside the Portal, Ullah and Malak considered, Ullah preferred)

Maddocks v Lyne

(First Tier Appeal - Entire Portal settlements are binding)

Portal Offers outside the Portal

Purcell v McGarry

(Portal offers are open for acceptance in Stage 3)

Akinroyde v Esure

(Portal offers are open for acceptance even after Part 7 proceedings issued)

Offer of Zero is a Valid Offer

Interim Payments

Luvin v Ageas Insurance Ltd

(Sets out the rules and procedure on interim payments)

Ampratwum v Zbigniew Samajeden & Esure

(special rules on interim payments for vehicle related damages - judgment not available)

Range of Prognosis Period given

Dominic v Martin

(First Portal appeal, established that should award in middle where range of prognosis given in absence of witness evidence)

Submissions gratefully received

Sarah Robson is always very happy to receive any cases on matters related to

the Portal Protocol or fixed costs to add to this website

Call Sarah Robson on 0800 634 9650*

or Email on [email protected]*

*NB Sarah Robson is not a Direct Access Barrister

Members of the Public should not telephone, but should see a solicitor

© 2019 Sarah Robson Barrister