Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Assessment of Costs » Page 8
SUCCESSFUL CHALLENGE TO 100% SUCCESS FEE UPHELD ON APPEAL: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF COSTS

SUCCESSFUL CHALLENGE TO 100% SUCCESS FEE UPHELD ON APPEAL: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF COSTS

March 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In  Herbert v HH Law Ltd [2018] EWHC 580 (QB) Mr Justice Soole refused a solicitor’s appeal against a decision reducing the success fee from 100% to 15%.  This is a very important decision for claimant personal injury lawyers who, habitually,…

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR'S SURVIVAL GUIDE  VI: COULD PROJECT MANAGEMENT HELP?

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VI: COULD PROJECT MANAGEMENT HELP?

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Members Content

This series on proportionality for litigators is a long-running one.  One suggestion is that “Legal project management” could help.  There is a very short entry in Wikipedia as to what “Legal project management” is. LEGAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT I put questions to…

COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY  TEST APPLY - EVEN IN A CASE FOR £350 MILLION

COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY TEST APPLY – EVEN IN A CASE FOR £350 MILLION

November 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

in Sharp & Ors v Blank & Ors [2017] EWHC 141 (Ch)  Mr Justice Nugee considered the issue of proportionality in a case where £350 million was at stake. Mr Justice Nugee decided that the requirement for costs budgeting, and proportionality,…

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENTS:  PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENTS: PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED

November 4, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In October last year I wrote how a speaker at the Association of Cost Lawyers Conference predicted a rise in the number of solicitor and own-client assessments. It has to be said that there have been some interesting cases in…

ORDER FOR PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT DOES NOT NEED TO BE MADE AT THE HEARING ITSELF

ORDER FOR PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT DOES NOT NEED TO BE MADE AT THE HEARING ITSELF

September 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

The judgment of Master Matthews  in Ashman v Thomas [2016] EWHC 1810 (Ch) has only recently arrived on BAILLI. It contains several important practice points in relation to payments on account of costs. THE CASE After the trial of a preliminary…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND INSURANCE COSTS:  POLICY OF £10,000 WAS BOTH REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL: HIGH COURT DECISION

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND INSURANCE COSTS: POLICY OF £10,000 WAS BOTH REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL: HIGH COURT DECISION

August 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Insurance, Insurance premiums, Members Content

In Mitchell v Gilling-Smith [2017] EWHC B18 (Costs) Master Leonard held that a £10,000 premium incurred in a clinical negligence case was reasonable and proportional.  It also highlights the importance of a paying party bringing actual evidence to court if they…

IS THE BUDGET DEFINITIVE ON ASSESSMENT? MORE CATS, MORE PIGEONS: THERE ARE NOW TWO TRAINS OF THOUGHT ON THE HOURLY RATE

IS THE BUDGET DEFINITIVE ON ASSESSMENT? MORE CATS, MORE PIGEONS: THERE ARE NOW TWO TRAINS OF THOUGHT ON THE HOURLY RATE

August 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

Earlier this month I blogged on the decision in RNB v London Borough of Newham [2017] EWHC B15 (Costs). Deputy Master Campbell decided that the hourly rate could be challenged at the assessment stage even if  the total of a particular…

COSTS BUDGETING: IMPORTANCE GUIDANCE FROM MASTER MCCLOUD: HOW SHOULD THE COSTS OF BUDGETING BE DEALT WITH IN FORM H AND THE FINAL BILL?

COSTS BUDGETING: IMPORTANCE GUIDANCE FROM MASTER MCCLOUD: HOW SHOULD THE COSTS OF BUDGETING BE DEALT WITH IN FORM H AND THE FINAL BILL?

August 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Important guidance was given this morning by Master McCloud (sitting as Deputy Costs Judge) in Woodburn v Thomas (Costs budgeting) [2017] EWHC B16 (Costs).It relates to how the costs of budgeting should be dealt with in Precedent H and any in…

BULLOCK AND SANDERSON ORDERS IN PRACTICE: UNSUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT ORDERED TO INDEMNIFY CLAIMANT AGAINST SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANTS' COSTS

BULLOCK AND SANDERSON ORDERS IN PRACTICE: UNSUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT ORDERED TO INDEMNIFY CLAIMANT AGAINST SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANTS’ COSTS

August 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Members Content

One of the abiding memories of learning (and teaching) civil procedure is knowing the difference between a Bullock and a Sanderson order.  Students (and practitioners) can see a Bullock order in practice in the decision of Mr Justice Nicol in Jabang…

TEN MINUTES IS A LONG TIME IN LITIGATION: SOLICITOR AND OWN-CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF COSTS CONSIDERS BILLING PRACTICES IN DETAIL

TEN MINUTES IS A LONG TIME IN LITIGATION: SOLICITOR AND OWN-CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF COSTS CONSIDERS BILLING PRACTICES IN DETAIL

July 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Shimon Goldwater  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Rowley in Breyer Group Pie -v- Prospect Law Limited (A copy of which is attached Costscase).  There are significant observations made in relation to…

HARRISON -v- COVENTRY: THE COMMENTARY SO FAR: USEFUL LINKS

HARRISON -v- COVENTRY: THE COMMENTARY SO FAR: USEFUL LINKS

June 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

The Court of Appeal decision  Harrison -v- University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire Hospital NHS Trust [2017]  EWCA Civ 792  is a significant one.   To help consider its practical significance here are links to the commentary on the case. (I…

WHY YOU SHOULD NEVER JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER: THE UNDERWOOD TRILOGY

WHY YOU SHOULD NEVER JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER: THE UNDERWOOD TRILOGY

June 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Book Review, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There are three volumes in Kerry Underwood’s guide to “Kerry on Personal Injury Small Claims Portals and Fixed costs”. Each has Kerry’s photo on the front. Should that put you off? As ever I have a “quick” review and a…

COSTS AT THE END OF THE CASE - WHO IS THE REAL WINNER? (AND MORE ABOUT FAILING TO PROVE DAMAGES)

COSTS AT THE END OF THE CASE – WHO IS THE REAL WINNER? (AND MORE ABOUT FAILING TO PROVE DAMAGES)

May 30, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Costs, Damages, Members Content

It is uncertain how much a three week jury trial in the High Court will cost.  It is certain that it costs a great deal more than the awards of £5,400 and £5,700 Mrs Justice McGowan awarded to the claimants…

EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF COSTS CAUSES JUDGE GREAT CONCERN: RBS COSTS ESTIMATES GREATLY EXCEEDED - NOW £129 MILLION

EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF COSTS CAUSES JUDGE GREAT CONCERN: RBS COSTS ESTIMATES GREATLY EXCEEDED – NOW £129 MILLION

May 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

The RBS Rights Issue Litigation is clearly a major and unusual case.  However costs have to be reasonable and proportionate even (and perhaps especially) in this type of litigation. This is made clear in the judgment of Mr Justice Hildyard…

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE I: TO AVOID "AGREEMENT" OF COSTS BUDGETS BY DEFAULT READ DIRECTIONS FOR THE CCMC WITH CONSIDERABLE CARE

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE I: TO AVOID “AGREEMENT” OF COSTS BUDGETS BY DEFAULT READ DIRECTIONS FOR THE CCMC WITH CONSIDERABLE CARE

May 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am doing a series of posts on matters arising from the APIL annual conference.  I am not aiming to cover all the issues and matters raised.  People can (and should) read the Presidents speech .   Given the nature of…

MERRIX NOT BEING APPEALED (BUT HARRISON IS - WATCH THIS SPACE)

MERRIX NOT BEING APPEALED (BUT HARRISON IS – WATCH THIS SPACE)

April 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The decision in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 346 (QB) is not being appealed by the defendant. The rationale is, apparently, that the defendant did not want to risk losing the listing of the appeal in Harrison…

BILL OF £101,677.21  AND THE CLAIMANT ENDS UP WITH £2,515.60: MISCONDUCT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS HAS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES

BILL OF £101,677.21 AND THE CLAIMANT ENDS UP WITH £2,515.60: MISCONDUCT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS HAS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES

April 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Justin Edwards of BLM solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Whalan in Jago -v-Whitbread a decision of Master Whalan. A copy of that case is attached here ( 2016.10.05 – Approved Judgment)….

KNOW (AND FOLLOW) THE RULES - OR ELSE: DPP COPS IT.

KNOW (AND FOLLOW) THE RULES – OR ELSE: DPP COPS IT.

April 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There is some irony in the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in R (RA) -v- The Director of Public Prosecutions [2017] EWHC 714 (Admin).  The claimant, a litigant in person, complied with the rules. The defendant, a specialised government department…

NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT HAD TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £500,000

NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT HAD TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £500,000

March 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Lyons -v- Fox Williams LLP  [2017] EWHC 532 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered issues relating to costs after a claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim for professional negligence. THE CASE The claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim…

"AGREED" COSTS BUDGETS NOT APPROVED BY THE COURT : THAT QC IS JUST TOO EXPENSIVE - THINK AGAIN

“AGREED” COSTS BUDGETS NOT APPROVED BY THE COURT : THAT QC IS JUST TOO EXPENSIVE – THINK AGAIN

March 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Brown -v- BCA Trading Limited [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) Mr Registrar Jones refused to approve “agreed” budgets. He held that the fees of leading counsel were too high and needed to be reconsidered. This shows that an agreement between…

COSTS AFTER NOMINAL DAMAGES AND PART 36 OFFERS: THE CLAIMANTS WHO TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GOT £2.00 INSTEAD

COSTS AFTER NOMINAL DAMAGES AND PART 36 OFFERS: THE CLAIMANTS WHO TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GOT £2.00 INSTEAD

March 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We looked at the decision of Mr Justice Leggatt in Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) in an earlier post.   The judge held that the defendants were in breach but that the claimants had suffered no loss….

COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED

COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED

March 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The previous post looked at the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car Giant Limited -v- the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hammersmith [2017] EWHC 197 (TCC). Here we look at the subsequent judgment on costs at [2017]…

SOLICITOR'S BILL AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WITH £4.2 MILLION AT STAKE

SOLICITOR’S BILL AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WITH £4.2 MILLION AT STAKE

March 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

The case of Eurasian Natural Resources -v- Dechert LLP  [2017] EWHC B4 (Costs) has already attracted much attention. A previous hearing before the Court of Appeal involved no less than five QCs just to determine whether aspects of the solicitor…

LEGAL COMPANY ENTITLED TO CHARGE FOR ITS TIME: SHACKLETON EXPLORES NEW GROUND

LEGAL COMPANY ENTITLED TO CHARGE FOR ITS TIME: SHACKLETON EXPLORES NEW GROUND

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In Shackleton -v-Al Shamsi [2017] EWHC 304 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare considered the question of whether a company providing legal services  which was the claimant in the action could recover costs for the time of its “proprietor”  spent in bringing…

PROPORTIONALITY, ASSESSMENT AND PREMIUMS: THE NEED FOR CAREFUL CASE PLANNING: £72,320 REDUCED TO £24,604

February 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Rezek-Clarke -v- Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC B5 (Costs) Master Simons upheld a decision to assess costs, claimed at £72,320.85 to £24,604.40.  The judgment emphasises the need for careful case planning, and consideration of proportionality, in…

BABIES, BUNDLES, HUMAN RIGHTS, PROPORTIONALITY, CONDUCT AND COSTS:ALL IN ONE JUDGMENT

February 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Proportionality

The judgment of Mr Justice Cobb in AZ -v- Kirklees Council [2017] EWFC 11 contains much of interest to the legal profession generally.  It shows the danger of failing to comply with court directions; make or respond to appropriate offers…

CELEBRITY TITTLE TATTLE IS NOT NEWS: A DECISION AS TO COSTS

February 5, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

The case of Stone -v- Flynet Pictures Limited [2017] EWHC B3 (Costs) is likely to attract the headlines because the second claimant was David Walliams.  It is also likely to attract the pun writers ( Litigation Futures has already done…

EVIDENCE, PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS II: NO SAVING OF ENERGY HERE

January 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

We have already looked at the judgment of Master Haworth in Savings Advice Limited -v- EDF Energy Customers Ltd [2017] EWHC B1 (Costs) in relation to the admissibility of evidence. Here we look at the judgment in relation to calculation of…

DISCLOSING DETAILS OF COSTS INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR MEDIATION : DISCLOSURE ALLOWED: HIGH COURT DECISION

January 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

In Savings Advice Limited -v- EDF Energy Customers Ltd [2017] EWHC B1 (Costs)  Master Haworth had to consider the issue of admissibility of evidence relating to a mediation. KEY POINTS Information provided about costs in the run up of a mediation…

PROPORTIONALITY AND ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES: A SCCO DECISION THAT DIFFERS FROM BNM

January 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

I am grateful Alan Mendham of Gadsby Wicks to for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Brown in Murrells -v- Cambridge University NHS Foundation Trust (SCCO 17th January 2017) a case that re-visits the issue of proportionality and…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2016: PROMISCUOUS BUNDLES & THAT CRAZY LITTLE THING CALLED PROPORTIONALITY

December 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Credibility of experts, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Injunctions, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This is the third annual review of the year on this blog. 2016, as ever, has been an interesting year.  As ever, a comprehensive review can be found in Herbert Smith Freehills A litigator’s yearbook: 2016 (England and Wales). PREDICTIONS…

PART 36 CONSEQUENCES AND A FIXED COSTS REGIME: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY MEET?

November 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Phonographic Performance Ltd -v- Raymond Hagan [2016] EWHC 3076 (IPEC) Judge Hacon considered the interaction between a fixed costs regime and Part 36. KEY POINTS The fixed cost rules in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court…

JUDGE USES COSTS BUDGET TO ASSESS COSTS AT THE END OF A TRIAL: THE RELEVANCE OF THE BUDGET & WHEN SHOULD THE COURT GO OUTSIDE IT?

November 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Sony Communications International AB -v- SSH Communications Security Corporation [2016] EWHC 2985 (Pat) Mr Roger Wyand QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) used the costs budget to carry out an assessment of the costs at the end…

PROPORTIONALITY DOES NOT AFFECT A PROPORTIONATE COSTS ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION

November 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

There are many aspects of the judgment in Amey LG Limited -v- Cumbria County Council [2016] EWHC 2496 (TCC) that are of interest to readers of this blog.  Here I want to explore the judgment in relation to proportionality. “The…

THIRD PARTY FUNDING: YOU WANT THE PROFITS YOU TAKE THE RISKS: EXCALIBUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

November 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Security for Costs, Third party funding, Uncategorized

In Excalibur Ventures LLC -v- Texas Keystone LLC [2016] EWCA Civ 1144 the Court of Appeal confirmed that commercial funders are liable to indemnify on the indemnity costs basis. “I can see no principled basis upon which the funder can…

QADER IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: FIXED COSTS NO LONGER APPLY TO ACTIONS ALLOCATED TO THE MULTI TRACK

November 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

Perhaps the most surprising thing about the decision of the Court of Appeal in Qadar -v- Esure [2016] EWCA Civ 1109 is the route that had to be taken to get to the result.  The Court of Appeal added, to…

A DISPOSAL IS A "TRIAL": COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

November 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

Several people have kindly sent me details of the Court of Appeal decision in Bird -v- Acorn Group Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 1096.  The Court considered whether a matter listed for a disposal under the EL/PL Protocol was a “trial”…

HOURLY RATES, SUCCESS FEES, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – ALL IN ONE CASE

November 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

There is a great deal of material covered in the judgment of Master Gordon-Saker in Various Claimants -v- MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B29 (Costs). THE CASE The court was determining various preliminary issues in relation to costs in the “phone…

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DIFFICULTY IN REVISING A BUDGET: AN ACUTE CHANGE OF CASE IS REQUIRED

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DIFFICULTY IN REVISING A BUDGET: AN ACUTE CHANGE OF CASE IS REQUIRED

November 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful to Michael Davidson from Acumension who has sent me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Hovington in the case of Warner -v- The Pennine Acute Hospital NHS Trust  (Manchester County Court 23rd September 2016) (available…

THE PARTIES CANNOT CONTRACT OUT OF COSTS BUDGETING (& A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE)

November 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs budgeting, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

An earlier post dealt with the decision of Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21.  However an earlier ruling in the same case contains a consideration of whether the parties can agree to sidestep budgeting….

TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE II: THE RISE OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS DISPUTES

October 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

One of the predictions made by several speakers at the Association of Costs Lawyers conference last week was the likelihood of a rise in the number of solicitor and own client disputes in relation to costs. Clients are now paying…

WHEN SHOULD A WINNING PARTY PAY THE COSTS OF THE OTHER SIDE?

October 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Hospira UK Limited -v- Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC [2016] EWHC 2661 Pat Mr Justice Henry Carr considered the question of when an “issue based” costs order should be made. “In my view, this apparent dichotomy may be resolved by a…

RECOVERING LITIGATION FUNDING COSTS: A HIGH COURT CASE -BUT ABOUT ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

October 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Arbitration,, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Professor Dominic Regan and Nicholas Bacon QC for sending me a copy of the decision in Essar Oilfields -v- Norscot [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm).A decision of His Honour Judge Waksman QC sitting as a Judge of…

COSTS BUDGETING AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: BUDGETING THE COSTS OF ASSISTANCE AND COUNSEL

September 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision today of Chief Master Marsh in Campbell -v- Campbell [2016] EWHC 2237 (Ch) deals with some important issues in relation to costs budgeting, the costs of litigants in person, instructing counsel and the nature of costs budgeting generally. “……

PROPORTIONATE COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: £33,813 REDUCED TO £3,737.50

September 6, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

In K -v- K [2016] EWHC 2002 (Fam) Mr Justice Macdonald reduced the costs of a successful party to an appeal in a family case. “The stringent test of proportionality in relation to costs incurred applies with equal force in…

COSTS BUDGETING IS APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY IN A HIGH VALUE CASE : BUT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL

August 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

In Signia Wealth Limited -v- Marlborough Trust Company Limited [2016] EWHC 2141 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered two issues relating to case management: whether costs budgeting should apply and whether a split trial was appropriate. KEY POINTS Costs budgeting A…

APPLICATION TO DISCLOSE THIRD PARTY FUNDER REFUSED

August 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Third party funding, Uncategorized, Useful links

The opening passages of the judgment of H.H. Judge Keyser Q.C. in Dawnus Sierra Leone Limited -v- Timis Mining Corporation Limited [2016] EWHC B19 (TCC) deal with the issue of disclosure of details of third party funding. KEY POINTS A…

BILLING YOUR OWN CLIENT: FIVE IMPORTANT LESSONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

August 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are number of important lessons to be drawn from the judgment yesterday of Master Gordon-Saker in Rahimian -v- Allan Janes LLP [2016] EWHC B18 (Costs). THE CASE The claimant sought an order that the defendant firm of solicitors deliver…

ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Damages, Default judgment,, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation.   In addition to…

FAILING TO FILE A COST BUDGET AND REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A HARSH LESSON

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Clinical Negligence, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

If a litigation solicitor is ever given the job of designing wallpaper here are the three key things that should form the recurring motif. The costs budget is due 21 days before the first case management conference. Where the claim…

← Previous 1 … 7 8 9 10 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A “COMPELLING REASON” PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE…)
  • WHEN DOCUMENTS WERE CHANGED AFTER THE EVENT: “THEY ARE FALSE AND WERE INTENDED TO DEFLECT BLAME”: SOME POINTS FOR LITIGATORS TO REMEMBER IF THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR CASES ON AN EVEN KEEL…
  • WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
  • COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN THE HEARING SO WHY SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE GRANTED?
  • COST BITES 334: CAN A CLAIMANT OBTAIN INTEREST ON COSTS EVEN WHEN COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BECAUSE THE MATTER IS FUNDED BY USING A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT?

Top Posts

  • WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE "MAN OF STRAW" IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT'S HOME INSURANCE
  • COST BITES 334: CAN A CLAIMANT OBTAIN INTEREST ON COSTS EVEN WHEN COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BECAUSE THE MATTER IS FUNDED BY USING A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT?
  • COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN THE HEARING SO WHY SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE GRANTED?
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A ROBUST OVERTURNING OF THE APPROACH TO THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT FIRST INSTANCE: "GENERALISED FINDINGS ON CREDIBILITY ARE NOT A USEFUL TOOL FOR RESOLVING SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT"
  • WHEN DOCUMENTS WERE CHANGED AFTER THE EVENT: "THEY ARE FALSE AND WERE INTENDED TO DEFLECT BLAME": SOME POINTS FOR LITIGATORS TO REMEMBER IF THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR CASES ON AN EVEN KEEL...

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.