- Published on
KembaraXtra-Case Law -R v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame Ltd [2000]
Case Overview
Applicants:
Case Overview
- Citation: R v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame Ltd and others [2000] All ER (D) 1174
- Court: Queen's Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court (England and Wales)
- Judge: Toulmin QC
- Date: 27 July 2000
- Subject: Costs, Part 36 Payments, CPR, Anglo-Spanish fisheries dispute.
- Applicants were companies/individuals in the British fishing fleet who lost registration due to the Merchant Shipping Act 1988.
- The Act's nationality, domicile, and residency requirements were deemed a breach of Community Law by the ECJ.
- ECJ ruled applicants could claim damages if breaches were sufficiently serious.
- House of Lords held breaches were sufficiently serious, entitling applicants to compensation. Trial ordered to determine damages.
- Secretary of State made Part 36 payments, which applicants eventually accepted, some substantially after the 21-day acceptance period.
- Applicants sought orders to receive all their costs despite late acceptance.
Applicants:
- Accepted Part 36 payments shortly after a court ruling allowed the Secretary of State to use fresh evidence, substantially altering his case.
- Lack of clarity in the Secretary of State's case and withholding of information at the time of the Part 36 payments.
- Denied deliberately withholding any information.
- Overriding Principle: The court has broad discretion to do what is just in all circumstances, adhering to the overriding objective.
- Part 36 Payments & Costs:
- Accepting a Part 36 payment after the deadline makes the accepting party the "unsuccessful party" from that date forward, regarding costs.
- Generally, the unsuccessful party pays the successful party's costs (but the court can order differently).
- This is a starting point only. The court must consider all circumstances, especially CPR 36.25.
- Time Extension for Complex Litigation:
- In complex litigation, a longer period than 21 days may be required to assess Part 36 payments/offers, particularly if the offer is detailed and made during intensive trial preparation.
- Outcome in this Case:
- The court extended the period for which the Secretary of State had to pay the applicants' costs for some issues.
- After that extended period, the applicants were ordered to pay the Secretary of State's costs.
- Discretionary Power: Courts have broad discretion in awarding costs, guided by justice and the overriding objective.
- Part 36 Consequences: Late acceptance of Part 36 payments shifts the "unsuccessful party" designation for cost purposes.
- Context Matters: The court must thoroughly evaluate the context of Part 36 payments, including the complexity of the litigation and the time reasonably needed for consideration.
- This case highlights the court's willingness to extend the standard Part 36 acceptance period in complex cases.
- It emphasizes that procedural rules are not applied rigidly, and the court retains discretion to ensure fairness and justice.
0 Comments