"THERE IS NO PORTAL FOR LOW VALUE PRODUCT LIABILITY CLAIMS": FIXED COSTS DID NOT APPLY

“THERE IS NO PORTAL FOR LOW VALUE PRODUCT LIABILITY CLAIMS”: FIXED COSTS DID NOT APPLY

I am grateful to Paul Balen for sending me a case report of a product liability case he was involved in.  The judge found that a product liability case is not required to be lodged in the portal.   This had…

COST BITES 35: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT SUCCESS FEES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: 20% REDUCED TO 15% BY COSTS JUDGE

COST BITES 35: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT SUCCESS FEES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: 20% REDUCED TO 15% BY COSTS JUDGE

The judgment of Costs Judge Brown in MNO v HKC & Anor [2022] EWHC 2919 (SCCO) considers the question of an appropriate success fee between solicitor and client in a personal injury case.  The judge did not accept the argument…

COST (MEGA) BITES 35: THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT THAT LASTED 104 DAYS : COSTS JUDGE REFUSES TO VARY EARLIER DECISION

COST (MEGA) BITES 35: THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT THAT LASTED 104 DAYS : COSTS JUDGE REFUSES TO VARY EARLIER DECISION

In Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc. & Anor [2022] EWHC 2920 (SCCO) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker gave a judgment which finalised a detailed assessment that had lasted 104 days.  The judge found that, prior to the assessment concluding, …

WHEN SHOULD COSTS BE SUMMARILY ASSESSED OR SUBJECT TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT? HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUES

WHEN SHOULD COSTS BE SUMMARILY ASSESSED OR SUBJECT TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT? HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUES

In Brake & Anor v Guy & Ors (Costs) [2022] EWHC 2907 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered an argument that the costs of an application should be subject to detailed assessment rather than summarily…

DEFENDANT SOLICITOR IN COSTS ASSESSMENT NEED NOT RESPOND TO PART 18 REQUESTS ABOUT PREMIUMS: "THE GENERAL QUESTIONS POSED ARE A PARADIGM EXAMPLE OF A FISHING EXPEDITION"

DEFENDANT SOLICITOR IN COSTS ASSESSMENT NEED NOT RESPOND TO PART 18 REQUESTS ABOUT PREMIUMS: “THE GENERAL QUESTIONS POSED ARE A PARADIGM EXAMPLE OF A FISHING EXPEDITION”

I am grateful to Nick McDonell  from Kain Knight for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge Rowley in Brown -v- JMW Solicitors LLP [2022] 2848 (SCCO).  In that case the judge refused to make an order…

JUDGMENT ON ADMISSIONS ONLY AVAILABLE WHERE LIABILITY TO PAY DAMAGES IS ADMITTED: INTERIM COSTS ORDERS REQUIRE SCHEDULES TO BE AT COURT: LESSONS FROM THE GRENFELL LITIGATION

In Abdel-Kader & Ors v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea & Ors [2022] EWHC 2006 (QB)Senior Master Fontaine considered the basis for applying for judgment and interim costs.   The claimants had not identified the basis upon which judgment was…

COST BITES 25: DEFENDANTS' CONDUCT LEADS TO COSTS BEING AWARD ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS

COST BITES 25: DEFENDANTS’ CONDUCT LEADS TO COSTS BEING AWARD ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS

Those who write “robust” letters of response to a letter before action may benefit from reading the judgment of Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Pisante & Ors v Logothetis & Ors [2022] EWHC 2575 (Comm).  The judge held that costs…

COST BITES 23: CLAIMANT FAILS IN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY OF A SOLICITOR'S BILL OF COSTS: CHAMBERLAIN BILLS HAD BEEN SENT; A SIGNATURE ON AN EMAIL WAS SUFFICIENT; ELECTRONIC DELIVERY COMPLIED WITH THE SOLICITORS ACT

COST BITES 23: CLAIMANT FAILS IN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY OF A SOLICITOR’S BILL OF COSTS: CHAMBERLAIN BILLS HAD BEEN SENT; A SIGNATURE ON AN EMAIL WAS SUFFICIENT; ELECTRONIC DELIVERY COMPLIED WITH THE SOLICITORS ACT

In Elias v Wallace LLP [2022] EWHC 2574 (SCCO) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker dismissed the claimant’s application for a delivery of a bill of costs. He found that (i) the bills delivered were “Chamberlain” bills and had sufficient information for…

COST BITES 21: RECEIVING PARTY NOT CONFINED TO PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT COSTS WHEN THE BILL SETTLES FOR LESS THAN £75,000: “IT WAS WITHIN THE DEFENDANT’S GIFT TO MAKE A REALISTIC PART 36 OFFER”

In  UK Sovereign Investments Ltd v Hussain [2022] EWHC 2390 (SCCO)Deputy Costs Judge Campbell rejected an argument that a receiving party’s costs should be confined to provisional assessment costs when the parties had agreed those costs at £59,000. The case…

ASSESSMENT OF A SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT BILL OF COSTS: THREE IMPORTANT POINTS CONSIDERED: CLAIMANT'S CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITOR STRUCK OUT

ASSESSMENT OF A SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT BILL OF COSTS: THREE IMPORTANT POINTS CONSIDERED: CLAIMANT’S CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITOR STRUCK OUT

In Sweeney v Wise Solicitors Ltd [2022] EWHC 2314 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley struck out a claimant’s application for an an assessment of costs against their former solicitor. The action seeking an assessment of costs was issued out of time…

COST BITES 16: THE CARE NEEDED WHEN QUANTIFYING "COSTS THROWN AWAY": 45% OF CLAIMED COSTS TO BE PAID ON ACCOUNT

COST BITES 16: THE CARE NEEDED WHEN QUANTIFYING “COSTS THROWN AWAY”: 45% OF CLAIMED COSTS TO BE PAID ON ACCOUNT

In  Cabo Concepts Ltd v MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 2024 (Pat) Mrs Justice Joanna Smith considered the amount that should be ordered on account when costs were “thrown away” after an action was adjourned shortly before…

COST BITES 1: USE OF A PARTNER IN A BOUTIQUE FIRM CAN LEAD TO LOWER COSTS

COST BITES 1: USE OF A PARTNER IN A BOUTIQUE FIRM CAN LEAD TO LOWER COSTS

There are many cases in which judges make observations about costs which merit wider circulation.   This series looks at those kinds of matters.  It starts by looking at the observations of Mr Justice Foxton in Hotel Portfolio II UK Ltd…

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT BILLS AND CONDUCT: CPR 44.11 DOES NOT APPLY: REDUCTION OF 75% OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT BILLS AND CONDUCT: CPR 44.11 DOES NOT APPLY: REDUCTION OF 75% OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

In John Poyser & Co Ltd -v- Spencer [2022] EWHC 1678 (QB) Mr Justice Morris (sitting with Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker as an assessor) overturned a finding that CPR 44.11 applies to solicitor and own client assessments. The practical result…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN EDWARDS COSTS CASE: THE TEST FOR A SECOND APPEAL WERE NOT SATISFIED

PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN EDWARDS COSTS CASE: THE TEST FOR A SECOND APPEAL WERE NOT SATISFIED

In May I reported on the decision in Edwards (& others) -v- Slater and Gordon UK Limited [2022] EWHC 1091. There was an application for permission to appeal that judgment. Permission was refused. Full details can be found here   THE CASE…