Seabrook v. Adam (Norwich CC, 22.01.19)

3rd September 2019

Anthony Johnson successfully represented the Defendant in this costs dispute that arose from a Fast-Track trial that took place in October 2018 where the DDJ had accepted the Defendant’s primary case that, largely due to inconsistencies in the medical evidence, the Claimant had failed to prove the 32-month back injury that he had alleged, but had found that the Claimant had proven an eight-week neck injury, awarding him damages of just over £1,500. At a separate costs hearing in front of DJ Reeves (a Regional Costs Judge), the Claimant argued that the Defendant should pay their full costs of over £33,000, principally for the following four reasons: (i) the Claimant had beaten a 90:10 offer on liability made after liability had been conceded; (ii) the Defendant had unreasonably refused to engage in ADR; (iii) the case was ‘exceptional’ pursuant to CPR 45.29J; and (iv) the Defendant’s conduct had been unreasonable in referring to fundamental dishonesty in correspondence but not pleading the same in its Defence and not relying upon the same at trial.

DJ Reeves held that the Claimant should be restricted to fixed costs, referring to the case as a ‘perfectly normal, unexceptional, common-or-garden RTA PI claim’, and accepting that the Defendant had been entitled to put the Claimant to proof given the obvious inconsistencies in his claim. He held that it was not unreasonable for defendants to put claimants on notice of the possibility of an FD finding even where the same has not been explicitly pleaded, and accepted that it would have been very difficult for the Defendant to make any offer in a situation where the Claimant’s prognosis had been ‘varying, shifting and altering’.

He found that the Claimant’s purported Part 36 offer could not be construed as a genuine attempt to settle the claim given that it related to a matter that had already been conceded 100% by the Defendant- he held that the ordinary, common use of the English language did not support the Claimant’s interpretation that liability extended to causation in a situation where the Defendant admitted the former but not the latter. He then held that ADR would not have been realistic or proportionate in a low end Fast-Track claim.

Having successfully resisted the Claimant’s arguments, the Defendant was awarded its costs since the date of the original trial on the indemnity basis, which could be set off against the Claimant’s full award of damages pursuant to CPR 44.14(1). The Claimant is currently in the process if appealing the decision.

Related Barristers

Anthony Johnson

Anthony Johnson
Year of Call: 2006

Close X

Coronavirus Update

TGC continues proactively to safeguard against the risks posed by the spread of Coronavirus. We have a working Committee who continue to monitor the situation and follow advice issued by the Government and Public Health England. We will be updating this page as and when new information becomes available.

As of 25th March, our London premises, 1 Harcourt Buildings has been closed until further notice and all barristers, clerks and support staff will be working remotely.

We wish to reassure everyone that our contingency plans we have put in place enable us to continue to provide our services.

Telephoning us

When calling our switchboard number, it will be diverted to a member of the clerking team who will be able to assist in the usual way.  All direct dials in Chambers are being diverted to be answered remotely.

Emailing us & Sending Instructions

Please send all instructions via email directly to we would be grateful if this could be sent in an orderly fashion to enable working from a screen manageable.  We are unable to receive hard copy instructions via DX or Post until further notice, unless specific arrangements are made in advance by contacting the clerks.

Please continue to communicate with barristers directly via email.

Conferences, Joint Settlement Meetings & Mediations

All conferences, meetings and mediations will take remotely, either by telephone or via video until further notice.  Group Telephone calls and video calls can be easily arranged.

Court Hearings

We are following The Government’s advice closely, which is changing daily. In keeping with Government advice, we will continue to service hearings remotely, where possible and as instructed by the hosting Court. The judiciary has made provision for some civil cases to be heard remotely, with lawyers being required to take part in virtual hearings.

We will continue to closely monitor this situation.

Making a payment

If you do not already pay us by BACS, going forward please make arrangements to do so. Please contact the clerks who can supply you with the relevant BACS details.

If you wish to discuss our policy and procedure relating to coronavirus, please do not hesitate to contact our senior clerk Dean Norton on 07535 753098 or

To learn more visit our Covid-19 Information page.