JPR (a firm) brought proceedings against Philip claiming damages in the sum of £80,000. JPR made a Claimant’s Part 36 offer three months before trial stating it would accept an offer in the sum of £50,000. Philip did not accept JPR’s Part 36 offer. At trial, JPR obtained judgment for the full amount of its claim, namely £80,000. What order should the Court make in relation to JPR’s damages, costs and the interest payable from the date the relevant period expired? [A]       JPR should be awarded interest on the sum of £80,000 at a rate not exceeding 5 % above base rate from the date the relevant period expired, costs on the indemnity basis from that date and interest on those costs at a rate not exceeding 5% above base rate, and an additional amount of £800. [B]       Unless the Court considers it unjust to do so, JPR should be awarded interest on the sum of £80,000 at a rate not exceeding 10% above base rate from the date the relevant period expired, costs on the indemnity basis from that date and interest on those costs at a rate not exceeding 10% above base rate, and an additional amount of £8,000. [C]       Unless the Court considers it disproportionate to do so, JPR should be awarded interest on the sum of £80,000 at a rate not exceeding 15% above base rate from the date the relevant period expired, costs on the indemnity basis from that date and interest on those costs at a rate not exceeding 15% above base rate, and an additional amount of £4,000. [D]          Unless the Court considers it contrary to the overriding objective, JPR should be awarded interest on the sum of £80,000 at a rate not exceeding 8% above base rate from the date the relevant period expired, costs on the indemnity basis from that date and interest on those costs at a rate not exceeding 8% above base rate, and an additional amount of £75,000.

Sanjay brought a claim against Julia claiming damages for breach of contract in relation to the supply of various goods and services. Six months ago, Julia made a Part 36 offer in the sum of £20,000 in respect of the claim, which Sanjay did not accept. The trial took place today, and Sanjay obtained a judgment in the total sum of £16,000 inclusive of interest. Sanjay asks you for advice as to the costs position following judgment. What is the correct advice to give him? [A]       Sanjay is entitled to the costs of the proceedings as he has been successful in his claim and the general rule is that the unsuccessful party will pays the costs of the successful party. [B]       Sanjay is entitled to his costs of the proceedings up to the date that the Part 36 offer was made, but should pay Julia’s costs from that date, unless there is good reason not to do so. [C]       Sanjay is unlikely to be awarded costs as he will be seen to have conducted himself unreasonably in failing to accept the Part 36 offer which he did not beat at trial. [D]       Sanjay is entitled to his costs up until the expiry of the relevant period and Julia is entitled to her costs from the date on which the relevant period expired, unless the Court considers it unjust to make that order.

You are prosecuting Ella, who is on trial at the Crown Court for possessing a controlled drug of Class A (cocaine) with intent to supply. To support the prosecution case that Ella is a drug dealer you wish to rely on several text messages sent to Ella by a male called “Dan”. Each message requests that Ella provide Dan with his “usual amount of cocaine”. The defence object to these messages being admitted in evidence at Ella’s trial on the basis that they are hearsay. What is the best response to the defence objection?

Following trial in the magistrates’ court, Sean has been convicted of common assault. Before retiring to consider sentence, the magistrates are told by Sean that he is in receipt of benefits, that he has mounting debts and has very limited means. The magistrates want to make an award of compensation to the victim of the assault. Are the magistrates required to impose on Sean a surcharge, in full, alongside the compensation order?

You represent Lydia who, following a trial in the magistrates’ court, has been convicted of ABH. Sentence has been adjourned for two weeks for the preparation of a pre-sentence report. At the end of the hearing, Lydia tells you that she wants to appeal against her conviction to the Crown Court. What is the time limit for Lydia to serve her notice of appeal?

You are the authorised court officer (formerly known as court legal adviser) in the case of Orin who is on trial in the magistrates’ court charged with affray (an either-way public order offence). It is alleged that Orin was involved in a violent disturbance outside a pub. Orin accepts that he was present but denies that he was involved in the violence. The prosecution case relies solely on the evidence of Simon, who, in examination-in-chief, gave evidence that he saw Orin throw bottles in the street, that Orin punched and kicked numerous people and that his behaviour was “out of control”. Under cross-examination, Simon accepted that he had been drinking on the evening of the incident but denied being drunk. He also accepted that he could not remember how many bottles Orin threw or how many punches and kicks Orin delivered to others. He could not recall how many people were involved in the incident. Simon accepted that he had a previous conviction for shoplifting three years ago for stealing food when he was homeless. Following the close of the prosecution case, the defence make a submission of no case to answer. This is opposed by the prosecution. What is the correct advice for you to give the magistrates following the defence submission of no case to answer?

You prosecute a s.18 GBH case. The defence have indicated that the Defendant would plead guilty to s.20 GBH. You have decided that this is an acceptable resolution of the case in all the circumstances and take the view that the evidence of intent to do serious harm is very weak. What is the most appropriate next step for you to take?

You prosecute Luke, the leader of a community youth group, who has pleaded not guilty to a charge of ABH on Verity, a 13-year-old girl who attends the group. The allegation is that Luke lost his temper with Verity when she failed to comply with group rules during an activity session and held her tightly by her arms, causing extensive bruising. He states that there was a verbal exchange between him and Verity due to her refusing to put out a cigarette he caught her smoking on group premises. He states that Verity has previously threatened to report him for things he denies. Luke asserts that Verity has previously made two separate allegations against teachers at her school which were not proceeded with, which supports the fact that she makes false allegations. He therefore requests disclosure of school records relating to allegations against teachers by Verity and any records confirming the existence of bruising to her arms and the dates of such records. Verity confirms that there were incidents at school in which she made allegations of assault against teachers. The disclosure officer tells you that he has contacted the school and they do not wish to release any records. What is the best course of action for you to take in light of the assertions Luke makes about the records the school may hold?

You prosecute Kwame in the Crown Court for dangerous driving (an either-way offence). It is alleged that following a road traffic incident involving Kwame and Junaid, Kwame deliberately drove at Junaid knocking him over and then drove off. Kwame’s case is that Junaid was the aggressor and he had jumped onto the bonnet of his car. Kwame drove off as he was scared about what Junaid might do. You serve a statement from Junaid in support of an application for special measures. He states that he is fearful of giving evidence and seeing Kwame again. Junaid fears reprisals if Kwame sees him in Court and believes that giving evidence behind a screen would improve the quality of his evidence, as he would not then have to see Kwame. You also serve medical evidence which states that Junaid suffers from learning difficulties, affecting his ability to communicate effectively, and he requires an intermediary in order to give best evidence. You notify the Court and defence that you wish to apply for Junaid to have the benefit of an intermediary and screens. The defence do not object to the use of an intermediary but oppose the use of screens. They argue that Junaid was the aggressor and screens will suggest that Junaid needs protecting from Kwame, adversely affecting the jury’s perception of Kwame, which will unfairly prejudice his case. What is your best response to the defence submissions?

You are defending Jacob, who is on trial in the Crown Court for ABH. The allegation is that he assaulted his wife, Laura. He relies on self-defence, stating that his wife attacked him with a table lamp and he struck her once to defend himself. Laura is the only prosecution witness. Jacob gives evidence in his defence. When summing up, how should the Judge direct the jury in relation to the evidence?