I made the mistake of reading a trade journal on the way home from Court today. Sometimes those far removed from the coal face raise a chuckle through such publications and articles as they profess wisdom from the comfort of a warm office.
An interesting article caught my eye as it put forward an academic argument on cost budgeting and Mitchell. In short, it put forward a view that if you were “Mitchelled” on a claim then a potential remedy is to make a tactical Part 36 offer. If you beat this offer at trial then you may have an entitlement to costs even if your budget went down the same route as Mitchell.
It was academically sound, but it smacked of desperate measures, and on the proper reading of Part 36 it is unlikely to succeed as the costs would fall down on “unless [the Court] considers it unjust to do so” provision.
Nice try, and points for originality, but not one I would place my PII insurance on!
Over and out.