Is it still good law? ⚠️ This case has negative treatment (1 citation(s): e.g. doubted / not followed / overruled). Check carefully before relying on it.
How to cite
[2006] EWHC 3656 (Ch)
Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.
“…s, a claimant’s unreasonable failure to accept offers of settlement have warranted an order for costs on the indemnity basis, such as Franks v Sinclair (Costs) [2006] EWHC 3656 (Ch); Southwark LBC v IBM UK Ltd (Costs) [2011] EWHC 653 (TCC); Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd (costs) [2011] EWHC 1107 (TCC); and Optical Express Ltd and Others v…”
“…[2006] EWHC 3656 (Ch), at paragraph 28). The Tribunal saw nothing in TfL’s conduct “to attract any sort of sanction or mark of disapproval”. But this, Mr Mallalieu submitted, was no…”