Report comment

This case is as finely balanced as it could be. I can see the arguments for both sides. It's clear that the value of the claim was understated when the claim was issued in light of the Claimant's solicitors' stance in immediately rejecting an offer at the very top end of the damages bracket for which the claim had been issued.
However, on the other hand provided that the claim was "received" by the Court before the expiry of limitation, any prejudice in not paying the correct fee at the time lies at the Court's door (and I see that the correct fee with a balancing payment was subsequently made) and limitation becomes a point for argument only because someone wants to have a go.