THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)
The RICS has produced a Practice Alert aimed specifically at those acting as expert witnesses in housing disrepair and other high volume cases. It some ways the Alert is surprising in that it says nothing new, that is most of…
ANOTHER CASE OF SOMEONE BREACHING THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT: THE DRAFT SHOULD NOT BE HANDED OVER THE THE LAWYER’S MARKETING DEPARTMENT
It is difficult to believe that cases about lawyers accidently breaching a judgment embargo still happen. However the reports keep coming. Prominent firms of solicitors, and barristers’ chambers have, over the years fallen foul of the rules. In particular a…
COST BITES 233: VARDY -v- ROONEY: SOME EXTRA TIME ON THE COSTS ISSUES: CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT DID NOT CROSS THE LINE -NO REDUCTION OF COSTS OF APPEAL
In Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 1027 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh made some further costs rulings following the dismissal of the defendant’s appeal on issues relating to costs. Firstly he rejected the defendant’s arguments that the claimant’s costs should be…
COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL
In Franklin v Your Lawyers Ltd [2025] EWHC 984 (SCCO) Acting Senior Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a defendant solicitor’s argument that it should recover its costs after its former client had issued proceedings seeking the delivery of a statute bill. …
COST BITES 227 : THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 80% OF THE COSTS OF TWO APPLICATIONS: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
I am grateful to James Packer of Duncan Lewis for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mlundira -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 189 (KB), a copy of which…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: TEN KEY POINTS CONSIDERED: ACT PROMPLY, ACT PROPERLY AND DON’T TELL LIES
Legal Futures carries a report of a paralegal banned from the profession because she tried to cover up a mistake by lying to the court. This gives me a reason to reiterate points made regularly on this blog about what…
“THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK”: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN
In Stephen Herbert Hunt v Oceania Capital Reserves Limited & Ors [2025] EWHC 837 (Ch) Master Brightwell refused the second and third defendants application for relief from sanctions in a case where the costs budget was served late. However it…
VARDY -v- ROONEY: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT HAD BEEN GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT IN COSTS ASSESSMENT FAILS TO CROSS THE LINE
In Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 851 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh rejected the claimant’s arguments that the defendant’s solicitors had misconducted themselves improperly and that there should consequently be a disallowance of some of the costs claimed by the…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS JUST ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS: EXPERT CONCEDES THAT PARTS OF THEIR EVIDENCE WAS “APPALLING”: ONE OF THE PARTIES DESCRIBED IT AS “TERRIFYING”
In LB Croydon v D (Critical Scrutiny of the Paedeatric Overview) [2024] EWFC 438 HHJ Kathryn Major (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) was severely critical of the medical evidence called by the local authority. That part of the…
LITIGATION “WHACK-A-MOLE” – THE MOVING TARGET AND POOR PLEADINGS – IN A CASE ABOUT ALLEGEDLY POOR PLEADINGS
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in Israel Russell v Barry Coulter [2025] EWHC 493 (KB). This was a case alleging that the defendant barrister had pleaded a case badly. The claim was rejected. However it is…
ANOTHER BREACH OF THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT: REMEMBER THIS IS A CONTEMPT OF COURT
In John Sisk and Son Ltd v Capital & Centric (Rose) Ltd [2025] EWHC 594 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a party had breached the rules relating to the embargo on a draft…
COST BITES 221: A FAILURE TO AGREE TO MEDIATE DID NOT LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS
In Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd (Re Consequential Matters) [2025] EWHC 503 (KB) Mr Justice Constable rejected the claimant’s argument that the successful defendant’s refusal to attend mediation should lead to a reduction in the defendant’s costs. The case…
“A POINTLESS WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY”: ATTEMPTS TO “REOPEN” ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT ARE HARDLY EVER FRUITFUL – AND CAN BE EXPENSIVE
There are a number of cases on this blog where litigants have attempted to “reopen” issues when a draft judgment is sent out to the parties for editorial corrections. We have an example in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies…
WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING
In A Father v A Mother [2025] EWHC 364 (Fam) Ms H Markham KC, sitting as Deputy High Court judge, made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The solicitors had failed to take steps to ensure that…
THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE
The judgment of HHJ Halliwell, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Bootle v GHL Property Management and Development Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 317 (Ch) provides an object lesson on the dangers of over-hasty applications for an injunction. It…
COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS “ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE”
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC), looked in the previous post. Because of the nature of the budget that the…
COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT – BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.
In Christodoulides v CP Christou LLP [2025] EWHC 214 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the appropriate approach were part of the Points of Dispute to a bill of costs were non-compliant. He held that the appropriate course of…
COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
In Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] EWHC 260 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith considered the arguments as to whether a major reduction in a party’s costs budget should lead to an order for costs being made, rather than an order for costs…
CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE – BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE
I am grateful to Professor Keith Rix for allowing me to use an article that appears in February’s Expert Healthcare Witness Matters*. This deals with the question of whether an expert can, or should, agree to act on a conditional…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW XV: REMEMBER JUDGES MAY BE TALKING ABOUT YOU: ADVICE FROM THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO
Here we look at an interview with San Francisco Superior Court Judge, Curtis Karnow. The interview was about a book the judge had written “Litigation in Practice“, which is available in the UK. The original interview by is Ros Todd. As…
WHEN A PARTY CITES, AND RELIES, ON CASE LAW THAT “DOES NOT EXIST” :”A MOST UNHAPPY FEATURE OF THIS CASE”
There is a very unusual element to the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Olsen & Anor v Finansiel Stabilitet A/S [2025] EWHC 42 (KB). The appellants, litigants in person, relied on case law that apparently supported their case. That…
INSURER FAILS IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AFTER A COURT HAD EARLIER MADE FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY TO THE CRIMINAL STANDARD: MANY TROUBLING THINGS HERE
In Aviva Insurance Ltd v Nadeem & Anor [2024] EWHC 3445 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as Judge of the High Court) dismissed an action for committal against someone who had been found to be fundamentally dishonest at a personal injury…
COST BITES 212: ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS OF COSTS FROM CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015 AND THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT
We are again returning to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). Here we examine the claimant’s (former client’s) arguments in relation to the deduction of costs breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015…
EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT WHICH LED TO SOLICITOR’S UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM A PROTECT PARTY’S DAMAGES: JUDGMENT FROM THE SCCO
In AKS v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd [2025] EWHC 126 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard recounted an extraordinary set of facts where a solicitor had wrongly deducted sums from their client’s damages. The judgment shows that this issue…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW XIV: “RAMBO TACTICS” DO NOT WORK (NEITHER DO THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION OR MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE…)
Continuing with revisiting guidance from judges in relation to advocacy. Here I advocate (hopefully in a civil way) learning from one judgment. That is the judgment of District Judge Chin in the extraordinary case of Revson -v- Cinque & Cinque in…
MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES II: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND: COSTS REDUCED BY 50%
We are continuing this series looking at issues of misconduct in the assessment process by looking at the decision of District Judge Griffith in Kerins -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (Birmingham, 31st July 2015). The claimant’s costs were reduced by…
MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES 1: LAHEY -v- PIRELLI TYRES LIMITED
Recent cases on the issue of costs being reduced, or disallowed, due to the conduct of the assessment proceedings have led me to review the cases on this topic. This is the first in a series of posts about the…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW X: A RECAP OF THE POINTS SO FAR: 10 KEY POINTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD
Carrying on with our revisiting this series we are having a short recap. Here were look at 10 key pieces of advice arising from the series so far. (There are plenty more to come). 1. ADVICE FROM CANADA – MANNERS…
MAXIMISING INTER PARTES COSTS RECOVERY IN HOUSING LAW CASES: WEBINAR 10th JANUARY 2025
I am speaking about costs for housing lawyers on the 10th January 2025 in a webinar arranged by Steve Cornforth. Booking details can be found by emailing Steve on stevecornforthconsultancy@gmail.com THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at how housing…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: REASONS TO BE WARY OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES (2): A SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL DECISION
We are returning to the issue of the difficulties that can be caused by the use of electronic signatures on witness statements. The dangers involved can be seen clearly in the decision of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in SRA -v-…
“PROFESSIONALISM DEMANDS THAT LAWYERS PICK THEIR BATTLES WISELY”: JUDGE GRANTS EXTENSION AND ORDERS THE LAWYERS TO GO TO LUNCH TOGETHER…
Coming to the end of the year, and with Christmas nearly upon us, all lawyers could benefit from reading the judgment of Chief U.S. District Judge David Proctor in McCullers v. Koch Foods of Ala., LLC in 2024 WL 4907226…
PROVING THINGS 251: TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT DEFENDANT’S LETTER WAS NOT WRITTEN CONTEMPORANEOUSLY AND CONCOCTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO EXCULPATE
The judgment of HHJ Berkley in Melia & Anor v Tamlyn And Son ltd [2024] EWHC 3002 (Ch) has a number of interesting aspects in relation to the assessment of evidence. One of those things is the judge’s rejection of…
COST BITES 196: COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: “EVERY POUND THEY SPEND FIGHTING EACH OTHER IS A POUND THAT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN”
In LI v FT (Maintenance Pending Suit: Costs) [2024] EWFC 342 Deputy District Judge Harrop made some important remarks in relation to the amount spent in bringing, and defending, an application for maintenance spending suit. “I am dismayed by what…
COST BITES 194: CLAIMANT WHO SUCCEEDED ON SOME, BUT NOT ALL, ISSUES AWARDED COSTS ON THE STANDARD BASIS
In FXS v The Mulberry Bush Organisation Ltd [2024] EWHC 2844 (KB) Margaret Obi, sitting as a High Court Judge, considered issues of costs where a claimant had not succeeded in establishing negligence at trial but was successful on other…
COST BITES 191: COSTS BILL REDUCED TO NIL BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: “THIS IS THE WORSE EXAMPLE OF TAMPERING WITH A FILE OF PAPERS THAT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED”
I am grateful to Simon Gibbs of GWS Costs for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge James in Kapoor -v- Johal [2024] EWHC 2853 (SCCO). The judge made findings of serious misconduct by the receiving party…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 5: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE: TO THE JUDGE YOUR CASE IS A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED
This series continues the recap of the views from judges around the world and the advice they give to advocates. Here we look at the article from J. Frederic Voros, jr for the Utah State Bar: To Persuade a Judge,…
WEBINAR ON NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS: 5th NOVEMBER 2024
My colleagues Steven Turner and Andrew Hogan are presenting a free webinar on the 5th November on Non-Party Costs Orders. Booking details are available here. The webinar considers the law practice and procedure relating to non-party costs orders in the context…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 4: “AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS” (OH AND BEWARE OF “WELL PADDED VANITY”)
Australia and looking at the guidance given by the Hon Chief Justice Pat Keane in his keynote address to the Australian Lawyers Alliance Queensland State Conference in February 2013. (At the moment I cannot find a link to the original…
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH PARTIES IF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE IS TO BE USED IN MATTERS OF CONTRACTUAL CONSTRUCTION: BEST NOT THROW THE KITCHEN SINK INTO THE MIX
In Workman Properties Ltd v Adi Building And Refurbishment Ltd [2024] EWHC 2627 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies sent out a clear reminder of the duties on all parties in a Part 8 case where the court was being asked to…
COST BITES 186: “MY CASE WAS SO HOPELESS I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY YOUR COSTS”: NOT A WHOLLY ATTRACTIVE ARGUMENT
In Mainwaring v Bailey [2024] EWHC 2614 (Fam) Mr Justice Henke ordered an unsuccessful appellant to pay the respondent’s costs. He rejected the appellant’s argument that his appeal was so evidently hopeless that the respondent should not have responded. He…
A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY DOES NOT AFFECT A CLAIMANT’S RIGHT TO RECOVER PROPERTY DAMAGES
In Senay & Anor v Mulsanne Insurance Company Ltd [2024] EWCC 12 HHJ Charman found that a finding of fundamental dishonesty in a personal injury action did not affect the claimant’s rights to recover damages for the property claim to…
COST BITES 185: VARYING THE AMOUNT PAYABLE AFTER A CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES: THE COURT CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PRE-DISCONTINUANCE CONDUCT
In her very last judgment in the case of Elphicke v Times Media Ltd [2024] EWHC 2595 (KB) Master McCloud considered the question of whether it is possible for a court to take into account pre-discontinuance conduct when considering whether…
WHEN A SOLICITOR IS A WITNESS IN THE CASE FOR HIS CLIENT (AND THEY ARE IN A ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP): THIS IS UNLIKELY TO END WELL…
The judgment of HHJ Russen KC in Kay v Martineau Johnson (A Firm) [2024] EWHC 2451 (Ch) highlights the profound dangers of a solicitor for a party being a witness in the case that is being brought. Those dangers are…
SOLICITORS, SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE DUTY TO THE COURT: THREE CASES REVIEWED
The judgment in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports & Anor (Re Wasted Costs Order) [2024] EWHC 2415 (KB) we looked at last week contained some important observations about the limit of a solicitor’s duty to check their own client’s social media…
APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS DISMISSED: NO DUTY TO “DUMP” A CLIENT WHEN FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED
In Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports & Anor (Re Wasted Costs Order) [2024] EWHC 2415 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed an application for wasted costs against the claimant’s solicitors. This dismissal took place at “stage one” – with the allegations…
LATE AND “HAPHAZARD” SERVICE OF TRIAL BUNDLES LEADS TO WASTED COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS (ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)
There are numerous cases on this blog about trial bundles. The issues never seem to end and have not been solved by the advent of the electronic bundle. This can be seen in the judgment of Deputy High Court Judge…
COST BITES 182: ANOTHER CASE OF A CLAIMANT PAYING THE COSTS OF A BUDGETING HEARING BECAUSE OF AN UNREALISTIC APPROACH
In Jenkins v Thurrock Council [2024] EWHC 2248 (KB) Master Thornett revisited the principles considered in Worcester v Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB) It was held that the claimant’s unrealistic figures in a costs budget should lead to the claimant paying…
COST BITES 180: EXCESSIVE BUDGET LEADS TO PARTY BEING ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF A BUDGETING HEARING
In Nicholas Worcester v Dr Philip Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB) Master Thornett awarded costs against a party who, the Master felt, had over-inflated their costs budget. The case stands as a warning that a party putting forward a budget which is…
COST BITES 177: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT RECOVERS ONLY 20% OF ITS COSTS (STILL GETS AN INTERIM PAYMENT OF £2 MILLION)
In Tata Consultancy Services Ltd v Disclosure and Barring Service [2024] EWHC 2025 (TCC) Mr Justice Constable found that a “successful” claimant who had recovered nearly £3.7 million in damages should only recover 20% of its costs. Both parties had…
NON-COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS (AGAIN): THE SOLICITOR’S STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WAS “FALSE”:
For the third time this week I find myself writing about judicial criticisms of the way in which witness statements have been prepared. This case has by far the most excoriating comments. In Fulstow & Anor v Francis [2024] EWHC…
You must be logged in to post a comment.