Aderounmu v Colvin (Costs) [2022] EWHC 637 (QB) (22 March 2022)

C had current capacity to litigate and had had capacity to litigate at all material times, secondly, that C had acquired actual or constructive knowledge for the purpose of s.14A LA no later than 20 December 2010 and thirdly, for the purposes of s.33 LA it would be equitable to allow the action to proceed. [2]

In the absence of agreement between the parties I reserved the question of the costs of the preliminary issue to the first costs and case management hearing. [3]

Ultimately all decisions on costs are fact specific and involve the principled exercise of discretion. [13]

it is appropriate to make an order for costs. This is contested clinical negligence litigation and there are no relevant offers. [14]

C is clearly the successful party. If the preliminary issue had been lost his claim would have come to end. The starting point must be that pursuant to CPR 44.2(2)(a) he is entitled to his costs. [15]