McMillan Williams Solicitors succeeded in fighting an appeal in the Court of Appeal and in the process established a new test for the rules that apply to costs payable when a case is discontinued.
Background
Mr Messih issued a claim against McMillan Williams for alleged negligence and at the same time another firm of Solicitors who he had instructed before us. Shortly before the Trial Mr Messih accepted an offer of settlement from the first set of Solicitors and then discontinued his claim against MW. The normal rule in those circumstances is that he should then pay MW the costs of the action. However, Mr Messih applied for the normal rule to be disregarded on the basis that it was reasonable for him to stop the case against us having settled his claim with the other Solicitors.
Mr Messih won his argument at first instance but this was overturned by the Court of Appeal in a ruling which established a new test as to the law applicable in these circumstances. Lord Justice Patten stated that there was nothing on these facts which justified a departure from the normal rule, particularly as the change of circumstances (the settlement of the main claim against the other Solicitors) which the Judge at first instance had relied on as the basis of the finding, was a change which was created by Mr Messih’s actions himself. There had to be wholly unusual circumstances to justify the Order made at first instance and there was nothing exceptional here. The test in the major case of Walker Wingsail should be revised in the light of this decision.
The case was dealt with by Geoffrey Stagg, the head of Civil and Property Litigation who instructed Mr William McCormick QC of Ely Place Chambers. Also James Scozzi, Head of our Costs Department, assisted.
Read the judgment which was handed down by the Court of Appeal here. |
