Rule 27.14 or PD 17? Costs for amended particulars of claim - small claims

[lepidus]

The claim has been issued and a defence served in the small claims court. I got some advice and applied for leave to amend my particulars of claim, which was granted. Now the defence are after me for the costs for responding to the new particulars of claim citing practice direction 17 (the usual order will for costs against the person applying to amend). But rule 27.14 says in small claims the court may not award costs against a party except for a bunch of different things, which don't include applications to amend particulars unless I have acted unreasonably.

Are there any cases which help with whether the court should apply the practice direction or the rule?

Thanks!

[Amethyst]

Did you amend your particulars after they had defended the original particulars ? And did you ask them to consent to the application before filing with the court ?

Was the Advice to amend from your solicitor ?

What was the reason for the amendment ?

[lepidus]

I drafted the original particulars and the defence responded. It was going to trial and I managed to get some advice from a barrister that I could actually afford which pointed me to relevant legislation. I applied to the court to adjourn the trial so I could serve better particulars. That was a granted and I served them. The defence did not agree to amended particulars so I made an application to serve them and the court allowed that as well. Now the defence are asking for their additional costs. Thanks for helping!

[pt2537]

I drafted the original particulars and the defence responded. It was going to trial and I managed to get some advice from a barrister that I could actually afford which pointed me to relevant legislation. I applied to the court to adjourn the trial so I could serve better particulars. That was a granted and I served them. The defence did not agree to amended particulars so I made an application to serve them and the court allowed that as well. Now the defence are asking for their additional costs. Thanks for helping!

The Court holds total discretion on costs, now PD 17 states A party applying for an amendment will usually be responsible for the costs of and arising from the amendment.

now while you applied before trial, it may be the Court took the view that making such an application fell within the scope of 27.14(2)(g) and thus its powers to award costs were exercisable after all late applications can be construed as unreasonable conduct