PART 36: CONDUCT & REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT'S COSTS: A SETTLEMENT STRATEGY THAT WAS "COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC"

PART 36: CONDUCT & REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT’S COSTS: A SETTLEMENT STRATEGY THAT WAS “COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC”

In Moradi v The Home Office (Costs) [2022] EWHC 3125 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the appropriate costs consequences where a case settled on the eve of trial.  The defendant made a Part 36 offer…

COST BITES  32 : NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS AGAINST DIRECTORS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

COST BITES 32 : NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS AGAINST DIRECTORS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

In OCM Maritime Nile Llc & Anor v Courage Shipping Co & Ors [2022] EWHC 2696 (Comm) Sir Andrew Smith considered, and applied, the principles relating to non-party costs orders against directors. “I infer that the defence of the claims…

LAWYERS SHOULD NOT BE RUDE TO COURT STAFF (INDEED, NOT RUDE TO ANYONE): A WORRYING REPORT

LAWYERS SHOULD NOT BE RUDE TO COURT STAFF (INDEED, NOT RUDE TO ANYONE): A WORRYING REPORT

The Oxford Mail carries a story on the 4th November which is highly disturbing.  The headline says it all “Judge adjourns case for a week after reports of ‘barristers abusing court staff’” This, if established, is appalling behaviour. Rude, abhorrent…

COST BITES 31:  ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE COSTS WHEN THE PARTIES HAVE SETTLED ISSUES: YOU MAY NOT GET WHAT YOU WANT...

COST BITES 31: ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE COSTS WHEN THE PARTIES HAVE SETTLED ISSUES: YOU MAY NOT GET WHAT YOU WANT…

In  Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors v SVS Securities PLC & Ors (Consequential Matters) [2022] EWHC 1431 (Ch) Mr Justice Marcus Smith considered the issues that arise when the parties have settled a large number of issues in an action,…

COST BITES 28: APPEALING AGAINST AN ORDER FOR COSTS: THE MAJOR HURDLE INVOLVED AND THE RELEVANCE OF A NON-PART 36 OFFER TO SETTLE

COST BITES 28: APPEALING AGAINST AN ORDER FOR COSTS: THE MAJOR HURDLE INVOLVED AND THE RELEVANCE OF A NON-PART 36 OFFER TO SETTLE

In TMO Renewables Ltd v Yeo & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 1409 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against an order for costs.  The case is a reminder of the difficulty in appealing a decision as to costs.  Further…

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 22: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS TO AVOID PAYING INDEMNITY COSTS FAIL TO FLY

COST BITES 22: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS TO AVOID PAYING INDEMNITY COSTS FAIL TO FLY

In Optimares SpA v Qatar Airways Group QCSC [2022] EWHC 2507 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver ordered the unsuccessful claimant to pay the defendant’s costs on an indemnity basis. The fact that the defendant could have asked for a split trial…

COST BITES 20: COURT MAKES A THIRD PARTY COSTS ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MISCONDUCT OF LITIGATION:  PARTIES GET THEIR JUST DESSERTS

COST BITES 20: COURT MAKES A THIRD PARTY COSTS ORDER ON THE BASIS OF MISCONDUCT OF LITIGATION: PARTIES GET THEIR JUST DESSERTS

In Ventures Food Ltd v Little Dessert Shop Limited [2022] EWHC 2437 (Ch) HHJ Richard Williams (sitting as a High Court judge) made a third party costs order on the basis of litigation misconduct by those who controlled a limited…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHO DID NOT ENSURE THAT THEY HAD APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY TO ACT ON BEHALF OF A COMPANY

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHO DID NOT ENSURE THAT THEY HAD APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY TO ACT ON BEHALF OF A COMPANY

In Rushbrooke UK Ltd v 4 Designs Concept Ltd [2022] EWHC 1687 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors who had acted for a limited company without…

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…

DIRE ISSUES ARISE WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS IN RELATION TO THE JOINT MEETING: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

DIRE ISSUES ARISE WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS IN RELATION TO THE JOINT MEETING: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

I have written before about the decision of Senior Master Fontaine in Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Ltd [2022] EWHC 479 (QB) where the claimants permission to rely on an expert witness was withdrawn because of conduct in relation to…