BNM -v- MGN: A DECISION OF LIMITED PROPORTION
The Court of Appeal decision in BNM v MGN Ltd  EWCA Civ 1767 has relatively limited impact. In particular it says little, if anything, about the proportionality itself.
The Court of Appeal were deciding an appeal following an assessment of costs:-
Expressed in less technical language and directed more specifically to the facts of the present proceedings, which are privacy proceedings, the issue is whether the success fee payable under conditional fee agreements between the claimant (who is the appellant) (“BNM”) and her solicitors and between her solicitors and her barristers, and the premiums payable under an after the event (“ATE”) insurance policy taken out by BNM, are subject to the old or the new proportionality rules under the Civil Procedure Rules on an assessment of her costs on the standard basis.
THE DECISION ON THIS ISSUE
The Court of Appeal held that the “old”proportionality test applied to the success fees and ATE premiums. The Master of the Rolls stating:-
The Court of Appeal remitted to the costs judge the question of whether it was reasonable to issue proceedings without notice.