John Ruskin College v Mr Colin Michael Harley
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Bean |
| Judgment Date | 26 November 2013 |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] EWHC 3714 (QB) |
| Docket Number | Case No: HQ13X00169 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Date | 26 November 2013 |
[2013] EWHC 3714 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Bean
Case No: HQ13X00169
Peter Houghton (instructed by Berrymans Lace Mawer) for the Claimant
Richard Devereux-Cooke (instructed by Hodkin & Co) for the Defendant
Hearing date: 22 November 2013
On 10 th November 1993 the Defendant Colin Harley ("Mr Harley"), then aged 18, was seriously injured while playing rugby for the John Ruskin College team. In 1995 he brought a personal injury claim against the College in this court. He was represented by solicitors, Stewarts Law LLP. Berrymans Lace Mawer ("Berrymans") were instructed on behalf of the College's insurers. A payment into court of £25,000 was made on 12 th March 1997. The notice of payment into court said that it was made in satisfaction of all causes of action in respect of which the claim was made and that it included a sum of £19,612.16 payable to the Compensation Recovery Unit. This would have left Mr Harley with less than £6,000 in compensation, and unsurprisingly it was not accepted.
On 8th August 2000 an interim payment on account of damages of £50,000 was made. On 26 February 2001 the College's insurers made a further payment into court of £250,000. By notice of acceptance under Part 36 of the CPR dated 7 th March 2001 Stewarts, on behalf of Mr Harley, gave notice of acceptance of the payment into court received on 26 th February 2001, "together with interim payment of £50,000 already received", in settlement of the whole of the claim. On 15 th March 2001 Stewarts received the £250,000 from the court pursuant to the Notice of Acceptance.
On 20 th March 2001 Stewarts paid £209,980.02 to Mr Harley. On 28 th March 2001 they paid him a further £15,000. In their letter of that date they wrote as follows:-
"I now enclose our cheque in the sum of £15,000 representing the balance of the damages less £25,000 being the amount we are holding against any potential shortfall in the recovery of our costs."
Thus by the end of March 2001 Mr Harley had received just under £275,000 in settlement of his claim. There was £25,000 still due to him. On 12 th December 2001 Stewarts paid him £20,000 of this, and on 14 th March 2002 they paid him £5,548.23. This last payment from Stewarts brought the total he had received to £300,508.27, which included a small amount of interest.
In May 2002 Berrymans, realising that the original £25,000 remained in court, wrote to Stewarts enclosing a draft consent order which would enable the money to be paid out of court and refunded to the College's insurers. There is a copy in the bundle of the draft consent order with space for the signatures of both firms of solicitors, but not signed by either.
Nothing then happened for six years until the Court Funds Office ("CFO") wrote to Berrymans on 11 th March 2008. After giving the title and case number of the claim the letter stated:-
"I am writing from the Court Funds Office in regard to a lodgement paid into court in the mid 1990s as a result of the above legal dispute. When lodged with the court the sum totalled £25,000. Due to interest accrued the sum now stands at £40,886.54. I am trying to trace the relevant parties involved as a sum of money remains unclaimed at this office. Ideally we would like to pay out this money to its rightful owner. … If you could be of any assistance in this investigation please contact me as soon as possible."
Correspondence then passed between Berrymans and Stewarts with a view to getting the money out of court and paid to Berrymans.
A letter was also written by the CFO to the College itself. Its vice-principal replied saying that:-
"The managers involved in this dispute are no longer at the college. However, documentation shows that a claim was made by a student at the college called Colin Harley against the college and it appears that the sum of £25,000 was paid to the court by the college. We have no written evidence to confirm the result of any court action and as such have some difficulty with providing the evidence to justify this claim. In the absence of any other justified claim I would argue that the funds are returned to the college where they can be used to further the education of young people studying here."
This letter was placed before Senior Master Whitaker who wrote:- "Refused. The college must have some record of Mr Colin Harley's address which they must supply to us. Efforts must be made to trace him." This led to the college providing the last known address of Mr Harley from correspondence dated 1993: this was in fact the address of his parents. On the direction of the Senior Master the CFO checked the address, found that the occupiers were Christopher and Sandra Harley (the defendant's parents) and on 23rd July 2008 wrote to them:-
"I am writing from the Court Funds Office in regard to a lodgement paid into court in the late 1990s as a result of a legal dispute. Our records indicate an Individual by the name of Colin Harley was involved in this matter.
I am trying to trace the relevant parties involved, as a sum of money remains unclaimed at this office. Ideally we would like to pay out this money to its rightful owner. Unfortunately, most of the paperwork has been destroyed and I have used the electoral roll to identify people called Harley in order to try and trace the correct person. If you could be of any assistance in this investigation please contact me as soon as possible on any of the contact details listed above.
If you are certain that you know the person involved please explain ask them to contact us as soon as possible.
If you do not know anyone by this name or are certain that it does not relate to anyone you know, it would still be appreciated if you could contact me so I can eliminate your names from our records."
Mr Harley senior says in his witness statement:
"As a result of receiving the letter I rang the Court Funds Office the following day and spoke to a colleague of Bharat called Peter; I told him that I was sure that the person referred to in the letter was Colin. He asked if I knew about any monies remaining in Court and I told him that I thought that Colin had had all of the money due to him. I told him that I still had some of the paper-work relating to the case in the loft. He informed me that the amount in question was £25,000 and he asked me to check any papers I had for mention of such a sum. I checked as I was asked and I only found one mention of this sum; it related to the holding back of £25,000 in case the costs of the case could not be recovered from the other party.
I phoned the Court Funds Office the following day and again spoke to Peter and told him what I had found; he asked for copies of the following: (a) Notice of acceptance of payment into Court; and (b) Letter to Colin from his solicitor regarding the £25,000.
On 29th July 2008 Mr Harley senior wrote to the CFO as follows:-
"I write in reply to a letter from Bharat Bhudiya, to my wife Sandra and myself, dated 23 rd July 2008 asking if we know an individual by the name of Colin Harley and also conversations I had with a person called Peter in your office on 28 th and 29 th July 2008.
We do know Colin Harley; he is our youngest son.
Colin was a pupil at John Ruskin College; on the 10 th November 1993 during the course of a rugby football match between the College team and a team from North East Surrey Technical College Colin sustained serious personal injury.
Colin sued the College under its own name at the invitation of the College's insurers. Colin was represented by Michael Morrow of Stewart's Solicitors, 63 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London WC2A 3LW — their ref : 625/MM/1318/1.
During April 2000 the parties agreed that judgment be entered for Colin for damages. (High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division Claim No. H9900332 refers).
Following discussions the Defendant (John Ruskin College) paid into Court the sum of £250,000; this plus an earlier interim payment of £50,000 brought the total amount on offer to Colin at £300,000.
On advice of Counsel on 7 th March 2001 Colin accepted the offer.
This then raised an entitlement for the Defendant to be liable for the Claimant's costs of the action.
On the 28 th March 2001 Colin received a letter from his solicitors that stated that £25,000 had been held back against any potential shortfall in the recovery of their costs.
As requested I am enclosing photocopies of —
(1) Notice of acceptance of payment into court dated 07/03/2001
(2) Letter to Colin from his solicitor regarding the £25,000.
Please contact Colin direct should you require any further information or copies of any other documentation regarding this matter.
In this instance I have spoken to Colin and he has given me permission to supply you with the photocopies you require."
He gave his son's address and telephone numbers at the end of the letter.
Meanwhile the correspondence between Berrymans and Stewarts had progressed to the extent that on 8 th August 2008 Berrymans wrote to the Queen's Bench Division at the Royal Courts of Justice enclosing a consent order signed by both firms providing for the sum of £25,000 paid into court on behalf of the College in March 1997 plus interest to be paid out to Berrymans. On 15 th August 2008 the Judgment and Orders section at the Royal Courts of Justice replied asking that the application be resubmitted with a Form CF200. No action was taken.
It appears that on 1 st December 2008 the letter from Mr Harley senior with enclosures was placed before the Senior Master with a draft form of order for payment out of the money to the defendant. The Senior Master wrote that "this needs to be sent back to the CFO to deal directly with Colin...
To continue reading
Request your trial