- Costs of abandoning parts of civil claims—amendment or discontinuance? (RG Carter v CUA Property)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: It has been held that where a discrete cause of action was abandoned by way of an amendment to a statement of case pursuant to CPR 17, it amounted to a discontinuance which attracted consideration of the costs consequences under CPR 38.6. The just order in circumstances where considerable expense had been incurred in defending a substantial abandoned issue was that the claimant should pay the defendant’s costs of the issue, not just the costs of and caused by the amendment. Written by Jon Lord, associate at Weightmans LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial