This site uses cookies.

High Court Rejects Claimant’s Application for Indemnity Costs: Evans v R&V Allgemeine Verischer [2022] EWHC 2688 (KB) - Grace Corby, Temple Garden Chambers

25/11/22. After succeeding on the substantive personal injury claim, the Claimant sought indemnity costs against the Defendant. While the Judge accepted that the Defendant’s conduct had been imperfect, it was not sufficiently poor to warrant indemnity costs.


The Claimant motorcyclist was injured in an accident which he claimed was the fault of the Defendant’s insured. The accident occurred on German soil, such that German law would be applied. Liability was disputed.

At trial, the Court found for the Claimant on a 100% liability basis. The Claimant was found to be entirely honest, straightforward and credible. He was a careful and experienced motorcyclist. Conversely, the Defendant’s insured driver had not attended for cross-examination (although he had provided a statement) and there were a number of inconsistencies in his evidence.

The matter then turned to costs. The Claimant had made a Part 36 offer earlier which he had beaten, entitling him to indemnity costs after the expiry of the relevant period. However, the Claimant sought indemnity costs for the entirety of the action, citing numerous aspects of the Defendant’s conduct being:

- Failure to engage with the Rehabilitation Code

- Failure to...

Image ©

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.