NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST INSURER: UNTANGLING THE WEB
In Various Claimants v Giambrone & Law (a firm) & Ors [2019] EWHC 34 (QB) a non-party costs order was made against the defendant insurers. It provides a (fairly complex) example of a court determining a non-party order. This “summary procedure”…
FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL IN THE COUNTY COURT
I am grateful to Sam Hayman and Tom Jenkinson from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Wulkwik in Miss Seyi Adelekun -v- Mrs Siu Lai Ho. (Central London County Court 18/10/2018). A…
DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL
In November last year I wrote about the case of Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB). This was a case in which the defendant refused to pay cost incurred prior to issue. Proceedings were issued and…
CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS: DOESN’T GET ADDITIONAL 10%: “UNJUST” CONSIDERED
A claimant who beats their own offer on costs in an assessment is entitled to ask for a 10% increase. In JLE v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (costs – offers – assessment of bills) [2018] EWCA Civ 2849…
UNANTICIPATED SIZE OF DISCLOSURE WAS AN “UNANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT”: UPWARD REVISION OF COST BUDGET ALLOWED
In Al-Najar & Ors v The Cumberland Hotel (London) Ltd [2018] EWHC 3532 (QB) Master Davison allowed an upward variation of the cost budget. The scale of disclosure given by the defendant could not have been anticipated and it was reasonable…
BACK TO BASICS 19: COSTS BUDGETING WHEN CASE IS MORE THAN £25,000 BUT LESS THAN £50,000
There are special rules governing budgets in cases where the claimant claims more than £25,000 but less than £50,000. Firstly the budget has to be filed much earlier. Secondly the budget “must” only be the first page of Precedent H….
A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS
An earlier post dealt with the judgment in McDermott -v- Inhealth Limited (19/07/2018) in relation to costs liability when a claimant settled against some, but not all, defendants in a clinical negligence case. That judgment was sent to me by Thomas Riis-Bristow, Associate…
COSTS AND “ABSURD” CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION…
This blog rarely looks at family cases. When it does it is often in relation to costs. Which is why the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in ABX v SBX [2018] EWFC 81 caught my eye. It raises one fundamental dilemma…
“THIS IS AN ARCHETYPAL CASE WHERE IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS”: ANOTHER LATE COSTS BUDGET CASE
The judgment OF Mr Justice Bryan in BMCE Bank International Plc v Phoenix Commodities PVT Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3380 (Comm) provides, as the judge noted, an archetypal example of the way not to go about cost budgeting, coupled with…
THE ASSIGNMENT (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER’S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN
In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC 3322 (QB) the proposed appellant did not get permission to appeal against a decision that an assigned (or novated) CFA remained valid. THE CASE The claimant argued that conditional fee agreements he had…
BACK TO BASICS 17: WHEN SHOULD A COST BUDGET BE FILED: WHERE THINGS GO WRONG
This may appear very basic. However I have seen both sides falling foul of this very recently. In particular the fact that the budget has to be filed with the directions questionnaire when the claim is limited to £50,000. THE…
COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES “OPEN” IS INAPPROPRIATE
I am grateful Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp to for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Jacobs in Yirenki -v- Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 3102 (QB). The judge allowed an appeal against a cost budgeting…
RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: “NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE”
There are interesting (and important) observations on the running up of costs in the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in WG v HG [2018] EWFC 70. This blog does not normally follow family law cases. However the question of costs is…
THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT
There is an interesting judgment in Britned Development Ltd v ABB AB & Anor [2018] EWHC 3142 (Ch) which should be read by anyone thinking of withdrawing a Part 36 offer. The defendants in this case made a Part 36 offer…
SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE GUIDE 2018
The new Senior Court Costs Office Guide has been published. This replaces the 2013 version with immediate effect. It is available on the link in the page here. The new guide Deals with all changes since 2013. Deals with the electronic…
THE COURT CAN (AND IN THIS CASE SHOULD) ORDER ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR COSTS
I am grateful to solicitor Shimon Goldwater for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder in Mayr -v- CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3093 (Comm). It relates to the principles to be applied when…
COURT HAS NO POWER TO MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS ON ACCOUNT AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Finnegan v Frank Spiers (t/a Frank Spiers Licensed Conveyancers) [2018] EWHC 3064 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss concluded that the court has no power to order a payment on account of costs after a party has accepted a Part 36 offer….
SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE
The judgment of Master Brown in Whitaker v Richard Slade & Company Plc [2018] EWHC B17 (Costs) may have some interesting implications for solicitor and own-client costs. In particular the finding that an agreement in relation a specific sum for work…
DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE
I am grateful to Barrister Kevin Latham for sending me details of the decision of HHJ Venn in Waring -v- McDonell [2018] EW Misc B11 (CC). A link to the full decision is also available at the foot of Kevin’s…
RESPONDENTS ALLOWED TO COMMENT AT HEARING : NEVERTHELESS SURVIVES A COSTS ORDER ON APPEAL
In Bhogal & Anor v Knight [2018] EWHC 2952 (Ch) the appellants failed in their appeal following an order that the respondent pay the costs of their initial application. The procedure described in the judgment is instructive. It was yet another…
