COST BITES 432: THE COURT CANNOT ALTER THE COSTS BUDGET UNLESS THERE ARE “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” : HIGH COURT DECISION
This case reiterates the essential point that the court has no freestanding discretion to vary a costs budget. An essential prerequisite of variation is that there must be a “significant development” that warrants a variation. There was no such development…
COST BITES 431: A CASE WHERE BOTH SIDES NEEDED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SO THAT THEY COULD ARGUE ISSUES OF COSTS: THE PROBLEMS FLOCK TOGETHER…
Here we look at a case where both parties required an extension of time in order to raise very significant arguments in relation to costs. The claimant had been late in filing essential documents for his own costs protection, the…
SERVICE POINTS 53: HOW DOES THE COURT PROTECT THE POSITION OF A PARTY WHO WANTS TO APPEAL DECISION IN RELATION TO JURISDICTION BUT RISKS “ACCEPTING” JURISDICTION IN THE MEANTIME? A PUZZLE SOLVED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
This judgment highlights the risk that a party who wishes to dispute jurisdiction can accidentally accept it. What, if any, steps should the courts take to protect an appellant in these circumstances. The litigant may wish to appeal to a…
SHOULD AN ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES GO AHEAD PENDING AN APPEAL? £8 MILLION COSTS COULD HELP AVOID £45 MILLION: THE TRIAL COULD MATERIALLY ADVANCE THE LITIGATION AND NARROW FUTURE DISPUTES
Here the court considered whether an assessment of damages should be stayed pending the claimants’ application for permission to appeal. This raised issues in relation to costs management and proportionality. The judge engaged in an exercise of looking at the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.