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
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
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
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
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…
AN EXPERT WHO TENDED TOWARDS BEING AN ADVOCATE: YOU SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN ANOTHER CASE: THE NEED FOR A MEASURED RESPONSE
It may be indicative that there are such a large number of cases where judges have criticised experts for veering towards advocacy that I sometimes hesitate as to whether they merit writing about. However such a tendency was noted by…
COST BITES 7: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT HAS TRIED TO HAVE A SECOND BITE OF THE LITIGATION CHERRY
In Tinkler v Esken Ltd (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1802 (Ch) Mr Justice Leech ordered indemnity costs against a claimant who, in essence, attempted to relitigate a case he had lost on previously. “A principal difference between an order for…
RESPONDENTS TO AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: YOU SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY WRITTEN A LETTER AND SAVED YOURSELVES £67,000
In over three decades of writing about civil procedure I cannot recall any cases about costs following a permission to appeal hearing. There are now two cases this week. In Kerseviciene v Quadri & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1757 (QB)…
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
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
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…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER 2: THERE WAS NO MISCONDUCT BY THE CLAIMANTS, HOWEVER THE COSTS OF ARGUING ABOUT CONDUCT WERE NOT ALLOWED
In Balaj & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWHC 1627 (SCCO) Costs Judge James considered, and rejected, the defendant’s arguments that the claimant’s conduct should lead to costs being reduced. However the costs of the…
THE REDUCTION OF A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT: RELEVANT CALDERBANK OFFERS CONSIDERED: RECOVERABLE COSTS REDUCED BY 15% AND 60%
In Mathieu v Hinds & Anor (No. 2: Costs) [2022] EWHC 1624 (QB) Mrs Justice Hill reduced a claimant’s recoverable costs. An initial 10% reduction was made because of the pursuit of a claim for provisional damages which was not…
ED SHEERAN: SONGWRITING, CONDUCT AND COSTS: THE WINNING PARTY GETS PAID: THE COURT WOULD NOT TURN REALITY ON ITS HEAD
In Sheeran & Ors v Chokri & Ors [2022] EWHC 1528 (Ch) Mr Justice Zacaroli rejected an argument that conduct during an action should lead to costs being disallowed. “This, however, is to turn reality on its head. The…
INDEMNITY COSTS NOT AWARDED WHEN A DEFENDANT REFUSED TO MEDIATE: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Richards & Anor v Speechly Bircham Llp & Anor (Consequential Matters) [2022] EWHC 1512 (Comm) HHJ Russen (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application for indemnity costs made on the basis that the defendants had refused mediation….
“IT WAS UNNECESSARY FOR MATTERS TO BE DEALT WITH SO EXPENSIVELY”: ANOTHER COMMENT ON LACK OF FOCUS IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT
For the second time today I am writing about judicial comments on profligacy in the Commercial Court. This time Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2022] EWHC 894 (Comm). “Even in the context…
WHY A SHORT WITNESS STATEMENT CAN BE MORE COSTLY THAN A LONG ONE? CONDUCT, COSTS, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT: AN (UNSUCCESSFUL) APPLICATION TO AMEND THAT COULD COST £1 MILLION
In PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Mints & Ors [2022] EWHC 1132 (Comm) Mr Justice Foxton considered issues relating to payment of costs after the claimants had been unsuccessful in an application to amend the Particulars of Claim. …
ANOTHER CASE OF A JUDGMENT EMBARGO BEING BREACHED: ALL RECIPIENTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE AND BREADTH OF THE EMBARGO ON DRAFT JUDGMENTS
In The Public Institution for Social Security v Banque Pictet & Cie SA & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 368 the Court of Appeal considered yet another case of breach of an embargoed judgment. There was clearly a breach (somewhere) which…
A CLAIMANT WHO OBTAINS AN ORDER UNDER SECTION 33 IS “SUCCESSFUL”: COSTS, CONDUCT AND INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS CONSIDERED
In Aderounmu v Colvin (Costs) [2022] EWHC 637 (QB) Master David Cook made an order for costs in favour of a claimant who had succeeded on a preliminary issue. A discount was made because certain aspects of the case had…
“WHY IS IT FAIR FOR ONE PARTY TO FOLLOW THE RULES, BUT THE OTHER PARTY TO IGNORE THEM”: PAINTING THE OTHER PARTY IN PERJORATIVE TERMS WILL NOT ASSIST YOUR CASE
In WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreements) [2022] EWFC 22 Mr Justice Peel had some stringent criticisms of the way in which a party attempted to bypass the rules on witness statement length. Also he highlighted the futility of making…
EXPERTS GOING WRONG – AGAIN : THIS TIME IT HAS COST (SOMEONE) £225,000: THE WORK TURNS INTO DUST
It is rare for me to write about judgments from secondary sources. However the judgment of Senior Master Fontaine in Patricia Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Limited [2022] EWHC 479 (QB) is noted in two reliable sources and it is a case…
INDEMNITY COSTS IN PUBLIC LAW PROCEEDINGS: FAILURE BY THE EXECUTIVE TO COMPLY WITH CONSENT ORDER TAKES THE CASE OUT OF THE NORM
In Butt, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Indemnity costs) [2022] UKUT 69 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal found that it had power to order indemnity costs, further, on the facts of this case…
WHEN WECHAT MESSAGES ARE LOST OR DESTROYED – BY A TWO YEAR OLD: THE ADVERSE INFERENCES A COURT CAN DRAW
In ED & F Man Capital Markets Ltd v Come Harvest Holdings Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 229 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver considered a case where Wechat messages had been “lost”. The judge concluded that the “loss” was deliberate and…
LAWYERS AS SCHOOCHILDREN IN THE PLAYGROUND: BAD-TEMPERED LITIGATION: THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: THE TAIL TO AND NOT THE DOG ITSELF
In Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2022] EWHC 242 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) made some trenchant observations in relation to arguments about costs on summary assessment. The criticisms of the way that litigation…
“THERE IS A DANGER … THAT PROPORTIONATE ORDERS END UP UNDERMINING THE GENERAL RULE THAT COSTS FOLLOW THE EVENT”: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT GETS 100% OF THEIR COSTS
In Deutsche Bank AG London v Comune Di Busto Arsizio [2022] EWHC 219 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill considered, and rejected, the defendant’s arguments that there should be a “proportionate” costs order. The judgment serves as a reminder of the basic…
THE NEED FOR VARIATION OF THE TONE OF CORRESPONDENCE IN LITIGATION: OUTRAGED OFFENCE AND BEING PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE IS USUALLY OFF KEY
I am grateful to solicitor Richard Harrison for allowing me to reproduce his post on “The importance of tone in litigation”. This blog has looked, many times, at judicial criticism of intemperate correspondence. Richard’s observations here will strike a chord…
SHOULD A RESPONDENT RECEIVE HIS COSTS FOR BEING SENT TO PRISON? JUDGE CONSIDERS ISSUES AFTER CONTEMPT OF COURT HEARING
In Kea Investments Ltd v Watson [2022] EWHC 5 (Ch) Lord Justice Nugee considered the question of what costs order should be made after a respondent had been committed to prison for contempt. The applicant had succeeded on some, but…
CONDUCT AND COSTS: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT RECOVERS – NOTHING
In European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Ltd v Treon & Ors [2021] EWHC 2866 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles considered issues relating to costs after a defendant had succeeded at trial because the claimant’s action was statute barred. The judge…
IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNENFORCEABLE IF THE SOLICITOR BREACHES THE CODE OF CONDUCT? MUCH TO THINK ABOUT?
The judgment of Mr Justice Trower in Winros Partnership v Global Energy Horizons Corporation [2021] EWHC 3410 (Ch) gives much for lawyers to think about. Here I want to concentrate on one element of that judgment- does a failure to…
THE SOLICITOR, SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE DUTY TO DISCLOSE: WHEN A SOLICITOR ADVISES THAT DOCUMENTS BE DELETED OR HIDDEN…
There is an interesting/alarming report of an (unnamed) case on Kennedy’s website here, as part of a general discussion about wasted costs. Discussing issues relating to fundamental dishonesty there is an account of a recent case where a claim had…
SOLICITOR SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN COMPELLED TO ATTEND COURT TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION
In Hunt v Annolight Ltd & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1663 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that a solicitor should be compelled to attend court to give evidence in a wasted costs application. “Any requirement for a solicitor…
RECORDING COURT PROCEEDING WITHOUT PERMISSION: THE PROBLEM ARISES – AGAIN
In Business Mortgage Finance 4 Plc & Ors v Hussain & Ors [2021] EWHC 2766 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles gave a judgment in another case where a party had recorded proceedings without permission. Permission was given retrospectively, however this was…
COSTS OF ASSESSMENT CAN BE REDUCED BECAUSE BILL WAS REDUCED: NO NEED FOR MISCONDUCT OR SKULDUGGERY
In Milbrooke Construction Ltd v Jones [2021] EWHC B20 (Costs) Costs Judge Brown found that the reduction of a bill of costs by a major percentage can be grounds, in itself, for disallowing part of the receiving party’s costs of…
WASTED COSTS AND THE SOLICITOR AS TARGET: “HEAVY SATELLITE LITIGATION IS TO BE DEPRECATED”
The judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su & Ors [2021] EWHC 2702 (Comm) is essential reading for anyone contemplating making a wasted costs application. It is, of course, equally important for anyone defending such…
DRAFT JUDGMENTS AND THE USE OF EMAIL EXPLODERS: MORE CAUTION IS NEEDED
One particular aspect of the judgment in Optis Cellular Technology Inc & Anor v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2694 (Pat)that requires highlighting is the judge’s consideration of the use of “e-mail exploders” used by the parties when…
NO MATTER HOW BIG YOU ARE, OR HOW IMPORTANT (YOU THINK) YOU ARE – YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES: SECRETARY OF STATE REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Good Law Project Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2021] EWHC 2595 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser issued a clear and stark warning that expert evidence has to comply with the…
LITIGATION, DELAY AND THE DOCTRINE OF LACHES: IT WOULD BE “UNCONSCIONABLE FOR THE COURT TO GRANT THE APPLICANT ANY RELIEF”
The judgment of ICC Judge Barber in CSB 123 Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 2506 (Ch)is interesting for a large number of reasons. Not least the total failure of the applicant to establish major (if not all) parts of its case,…
RUDE CORRESPONDENCE: A RECAP: JUST REMEMBER WHAT YOU WRITE COULD END UP ON A BLOG SOME DAY (FOR THE WHOLE WORLD TO SEE…)
Several search terms that led people to this blog today related to the “arrogant tone of solicitor correspondence”. This seems like a good time to recap on Guidance and case law where, shall we say “assertive” correspondence has been considered…
JUDGE ENTITLED TO FIND A CLAIMANT WAS NOT DISHONEST: IT MAY BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO DIRECT ATTENTION TO SOLICITOR RATHER THAN THE “HAPLESS CLIENT”
In Michael v I E & D Hurford Ltd (t/a Rainbow) [2021] EWHC 2318 (QB) Mrs Justice Stacey refused the defendant’s appeal in a case where the trial judge had found the claimant not to be fundamentally dishonest. The claimant…
“THERE IS A WORRYING TREND… IN TERMS OF FAILURE BY EXPERTS GENERALLY IN LITIGATION COMPLYING WITH THEIR DUTIES”
There is an important point about a litigant’s responsibility for the conduct of their own experts (and expert’s conduct generally) in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd (No. 2 Costs) [2021] EWHC 1414 (TCC). This was…
CLAIMANTS RECOVER NO COSTS AT ALL WHEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WERE “DIRECTLY UNTRUE”: ALSO LIABLE FOR INDEMNITY COSTS FOR A PERIOD
This blog has looked twice at the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC). There is now a sequel. In Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting…
LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT”
Over the years we have seen some biting judgments about the conduct of experts in civil litigation. I struggle to recall one as extraordinary as the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith in Dana UK AXLE Ltd v Freudenberg FST…
PROVING THINGS 211: PROVING DAMAGES AND CAUSATION: CLAIM £3 MILLION GET £2,000: “A WEAK AND SPECULATIVE CLAIM”
We have already looked once at the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC). However given that the claimants were seeking in excess of £3 million and…
A LOT ABOUT LITIGATION CONDUCT HERE: SIGNATURE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: POOR BUNDLES: POOR WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE TOTAL LACK OF WISDOM IN SENDING MATERIAL DIRECTLY TO THE JUDGE IN THE MIDDLE OF A TRIAL…
The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC) demonstrate some “unusual” conduct in litigation. Not least the claimant’s solicitors wrote to the judge, in the middle of…
CAN THE COURT MAKE A COSTS ORDER AFTER A THE FIRST PART OF A SPLIT TRIAL? THE RELEVANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER
In Original Beauty Technology Company Ltd & Ors v G4k Fashion Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 954 (Ch) David Stone (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the question of whether the court should make a costs order after a…
CASES WHERE JUDGES GOT TO READ THINGS THAT LAWYERS WISH THEY HAD NEVER WRITTEN
The earlier post about judges reading information about lawyers online has given rise to a lot of comments and commentary. There are occasions when judges, as part of their job, get to read things that lawyers wish they had never…
BUNDLES AGAIN: JUDGES WASTING THEIR BREATH: “HOW MANY YEARS – DECADES – HAVE TO PASS BEFORE THOSE WHO KNOW BETTER AND WHO… ARE BEING HANDSOMELY REMUNERATED COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS?”
Another post that adds to the dozens, if not hundreds, of cases about bundles. The trial bundles were the subject of considerable criticism by Sir James Munby in C (A Child) [2021] EWFC 32. “I forebear from further judicial exhortation…
“THERE ARE NOT TWO SETS OF RULES FOR LITIGATION IN THIS JURISDICTION”: COURT AWARDS INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON
In Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation v Hardy [2021] EWHC 817 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court judge) awarded indemnity costs against a litigant in person. “There are not two sets of rules for litigation in this…
COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47
An earlier post looked at the construction of the Part 36 offer in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division). Here we look at…
“THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES … AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION
In the judgment today in DVP & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin) the Administrative Court exercised considered a case referred to it under the “Hamid” jurisdiction…
You must be logged in to post a comment.