Collins v Thames Valley Police: Intentional Torts, Transitional Provisions and the Limits of FRCs
Written by Nick McDonnell, Director & Costs Lawyer.
The decision of Costs Judge Whalan in Collins v Thames Valley Police is one of the most significant Senior Courts Costs Office judgments to date on the expanding Fixed Recoverable Costs (FRC) regime. It tackles three issues that are already generating satellite litigation:
- What it means for a claim to “include” an intentional tort for the purposes of CPR 26.9(10)(e);
- Whether post-October 2023 costs-only proceedings can trigger FRCs in pre-issue settlements; and
- Whether acceptance of a Part 36 offer amounts to “contracting out” of FRCs.
While the Claimant ultimately succeeded in escaping FRCs, the reasoning on issues (2) and (3) will give many practitioners pause.
Background
Mr Collins’ firearms were seized by Thames Valley Police following his arrest in 2015. Some were lawfully destroyed pursuant to a court order, but others were not. Despite requests for their return, the police later confirmed that the remaining guns had also been destroyed.
A claim was intimated for negligence and/or wrongful interference with goods, with losses initially valued at around £228,000. Liability was effectively admitted. The claim settled pre-issue in February 2023 when the Claimant accepted a Part 36 offer of £32,500.
Costs, however, were not agreed. Part 8 costs-only proceedings were issued in December 2024, after the October 2023 extension of the FRC regime.
Issue 1: Did the claim “include” an international tort?
The Claimant relied on CPR 26.9(10)(e)(i), which mandates multi-track allocation for claims against the police that include an intentional or reckless tort.
Costs Judge Whalan rejected the Defendant’s attempt to characterise the claim as negligence only. He held that the reference to “wrongful interference with goods” necessarily encompassed conversion and/or trespass to chattels. The deliberate destruction of property was an intentional act. The rule is inclusive: the claim need only include an intentional tort, not be exclusively characterised by it.
Issue 2: Can post-October 2023 Part 8 costs-only proceedings trigger FRCs?
The court held that issuing Part 8 costs-only proceedings after 1 October 2023 is sufficient to trigger the FRC regime. A “claim” includes costs-only proceedings, and there is a single continuing claim until all issues, including costs, are resolved.
Issue 3: Does a Part 36 offer and acceptance result in the parties contracting out of FRCs?
The court rejected the argument that acceptance of a Part 36 offer amounts to an agreement to standard basis costs that ousts FRCs. CPR 36.13 is expressly subject to the fixed costs regime where applicable.
Why this Decision Matters
The judgment confirms that:
- Costs-only proceedings can engage FRCs even where the substantive claim settled pre-issue and pre-October 2023.
- Part 36 offers do not, without express wording, contract parties out of the FRC regime.
- CPR 26.9(10)(e) remains a critical exclusion in police claims involving intentional torts.
Costs strategy now requires early and careful consideration. Delay or assumption can be costly.
