The law on costs
28.Costs in the IPEC small claims track are, as for other small claims tracks, governed principally by CPR 27.14. So far as is relevant, it provides: (1)
This rule applies to any case which has been allocated to the small claims track. (2)
The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party’s costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal, except – (a)
the fixed costs attributable to issuing the claim which – (i)
are payable under Part 45; or (ii)
would be payable under Part 45 if that Part applied to the claim; (b)
in proceedings which included a claim for an injunction or an order for specific performance a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for legal advice and assistance relating to that claim; (c)
any court fees paid by that other party; (d)
expenses which a party or witness has reasonably incurred in travelling to and from a hearing or in staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing; (e)
a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for any loss of earnings or loss of leave by a party or witness due to attending a hearing or to staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing; (f)
a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for an expert’s fees; (g)
such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably;
… (3)
A party’s rejection of an offer in settlement will not of itself constitute unreasonable behaviour under paragraph (2)(g) but the court may take it into consideration when it is applying the unreasonableness test. 29.Section 51(1) of the Senior Courts Act applies to costs in the small claims track as much as any other, so the basic rule is that the costs of and incidental to proceedings are in the discretion of the court. The general rules about costs contained in CPR 44 are not disapplied in relation to small claims, although where there is an inconsistency with CPR 27.14 the general provisions of CPR 44 must yield to the specific provisions of CPR 27.14 in compliance with the usual rules of construction, see Solomon v Cromwell Group plc [2012] 1 W.L.R. 1048. 30.As can be seen from CPR 27.14, the starting point is different from that which generally applies in the High Court: rather than beginning with the initial presumption that the loser pays the winner’s costs, the basic rule is that neither party will pay the other’s costs, save as provided by the stated exceptions.