Wigg & Co - the indemnity basis
Call us on 01892 529518. Experience counts.
Reid Minty (A Firm) -v- Gordon Taylor
(2001 EWCA Civil 1723)
At the end of a contested defamation trial the jury found in favour of
the Defendant on the issue of justification and the Judge awarded the
Defendant his costs but declined to make an order on the indemnity basis
saying that the costs on the indemnity basis should only be awarded if
there had been some sort of moral lack of probity or conduct deserving
of moral condemnation on the part of the Paying Parties.
The Court of Appeal held that the Judge was wrong and that the court now
had a wide discretion under CPR Rule 44.3 which was not constrained by
authorities decided under the rules which preceded the introduction of
the CPR. There was discretion to decide whether some or all of the costs
awarded should be on the standard or indemnity basis. Litigation can
regularly be conducted in a way which is unreasonable and which
justifies an award of costs on the indemnity basis, where the conduct
could not properly be regarded as lacking moral probity or deserving
See also Amoco -v- British American
Offshore Ltd [QBD Butterworths Costs Service Bulletin January 2001].
News/Case Law menu