CAN MR MITCHELL STILL GET HIS COSTS? A PROFESSOR'S OPINION

December 4, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The comments section is at the bottom right hand side of this blog and a comment from Professor Hibbert made earlier this week may have been missed by many. I set it out below. No doubt this will give rise to some discussion and debate. On the 2nd December Professor Hibbert wrote:- "As a matter of i...

Enjoying this post?

Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and access all premium content.

Become a member

Already a member? Log in below

Tags: Budget, costs, Court costs, Mitchell

2 Responses

Domthedrafty · December 4, 2013 at 14:57:14 · →

I thought this would be an argument in this case – but I also wonder whether there is the potential for a Sylvia Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd conduct argument i.e. Mr Mitchell should be allowed to exceed his filed budget (even one which has been deemed filed), if NGN become rather aggressive litigants in light of the inequality of arms?
Mark Harvey · December 4, 2013 at 17:51:43 · →

No; In my humble opinion, “significant development” in the budgeting context means an unforeseen event; not in the contemplation of the party when budget filed.