THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL…)
In a judgment today the Court of Appeal have overturned a High Court decision that was (partially) in favour of a solicitor who had sought judicial review of a decision of the Legal Ombudsman. The Court has restored the Ombudsman’s…
COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: “THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE”
Here we look at a case where the court made an order for indemnity costs. The defendant had failed to engage fully in the litigation process and, importantly, failed to respond to the claimant’s offer to mediate. The Master was…
NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
Some significant changes are taking place in court fees on the 13th July 2026. Some 170 fees will increase in line with inflation. Four sets of fees will be reduced to reflect reductions in their underlying costs. In addition there…
COST BITES 403: JUDGMENT TODAY: SUCCESS FEE AND ATE PREMIUM NOT PAYABLE BY CLIENT WHEN THE SOLICITOR FAILED TO MAKE REASONABLE ENQUIRIES ABOUT BTE INSURANCE
Here we look at a judgment given today which highlights the importance of considering the existence of pre-existing insurance policies when solicitors are acting for a claimant. The judge held that the solicitors had made inadequate enquiries in relation to…
BOTH SIDES WANTED A STRIKE OUT FOR NON-COMPLIANCE – BUT GOT NOWHERE (A FAIRLY EXPENSIVE – AND FRUITLESS DAY OUT…): “LOCKED HORNS” AND “SPIRITED CORRESPONDENCE”
Here we have applications to strike out by both sides for alleged non-compliance with a court order. The judge described the defendants’ application as “aggressive” and the claimant’s application as a “tit for tat” application. Ultimately, however, we are looking…
COST BITES 402: DOES THE FACT THAT LEGAL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID BY RELATIVES MEAN THAT A RESPONDENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS? THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE CONSIDERED
Here the court considered an argument that the indemnity principle meant that an unsuccessful respondent was not liable to pay the appellant’s costs. It was clear that the fees in question had been paid by family members and not the…
COST BITES 401: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE’S DECISION ON COSTS: THE COMPLICATIONS THAT OCCUR WHEN A COURT IS ASKED TO TAKE DISHONESTY INTO ACCOUNT WHEN MAKING AN AWARD OF COSTS…
Here the Court of Appeal grappled with some interesting issues when it overturned a trial judge’s decision to make no order for costs. The Court of Appeal stated that although the judge had been critical of the conduct of the…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?
Sometimes it may appear that this series is a bit too “basic”, dealing with things that (surely) everyone involves in litigation knows. However, more often than not, the topics are chosen because recent events have show that there is a…
THE COURT PREVENTED THE DEFENDANTS FROM MAKING ANY FURTHER APPLICATIONS IN THE CASE UNTIL THEY HAD COMPLIED WITH PREVIOUS COURT ORDERS: A PROPORTIONATE USE OF THE COURT’S CASE MANAGEMENT POWERS
Here we have a case where the court considered, in detail, the appropriate response of the court when a party had failed to comply with previous court orders as to payment of costs. The result was that the defendants in…
COST BITES 400: MASTERCARD FUNDER FAILS IN THE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ITS SHARE OF THE PROCEEDS : IT TURNS OUT THAT LITIGATION IS NOT PRICELESS
We have got to number 400 in this series. It is perhaps fitting we deal with (what may well be) the tail end of a mammoth case. Further it is a case where litigation funders felt that they had not…
COST BITES 399: WHEN THE COSTS OF THE LITIGATION ALMOST ENTIRELY CONSUME THE VALUE OF THE ESTATE BEING SUED:
This is another case that litigators and litigants need to read. An action against an estate led to the net value of the estate being “almost entirely” consumed by costs. During the course of the litigation the (unsuccessful) claimant already…
AN OFFER TO SETTLE THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE PROVISION FOR COSTS MAY WELL BE INEFFECTIVE: IT CERTAINLY WILL NOT LEAD TO A PETITION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
Here we look at an argument that a petition should be struck out because the respondents had made a reasonable offer to resolve the issues between the parties. The Court of Appeal observed that the “reasonable offer” did not include…
COST BITES 398: MORE BUDGETING IN THE MERCEDES-BENZ LITIGATION: ONLY A “MODEST” REDUCTION OF £1 MILLION HERE: BUT WHY (THE COURT ASKS) WEREN’T REALISTICALLY REDUCED FIGURES PUT FORWARD IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Here we look at the remaining elements of costs budgeting in a case that we have looked at before. The reductions this time were not as severe as previously. It remains the case, however, that just over £1 million was…
COST BITES 397: THE PARTIES THAT SPENT £500,000 IN A DISPUTE THAT WAS WORTH £5,000: THE JUDGE FOUND GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS BUDGET (A CASE I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERY LITIGATOR TO READ)
Occasionally there is a case that sends out clear lessons to litigator and litigants alike. We have such a case here. I would recommend it for universal reading. The judge observed that the parties had managed to spend over half…
COST BITES 396 : THE CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT WAS SUCH IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS IN THE NATIONAL LOTTERY CASE; IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO REDUCE THE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANTS’ COSTS
We have seen many cases in which the courts have considered whether indemnity costs should be ordered. Here we have a case where the judge was clear in her view that the claimant’s conduct of the litigation was such that…
COST BITES 395: A RETAINER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE TERMS IN RELATION TO HOURLY RATES RENDERED IT TOO UNCERTAIN (COURT OF APPEAL DECISION YESTERDAY)
This appeal has been much discussed in the specialist press. A solicitor’s client argued that the terms of a retainer rendered in a Contentious Business Agreement. This would have given her greater scope to dispute the bills. The Court of…
COST BITES 394: COURT OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT LANDLORD IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE COSTS: AWARD OF INTEREST ALSO OVERTURNED
This is a case where a decision as to costs and interests was overturned on appeal. The Circuit Judge found that the claimant landlord had no entitlement to claim costs under the terms of the lease. Further the claim for…
COST BITES 393: A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAW FIRMS WAS VALID: THERE WAS NO BREACH (AND IF THERE WAS IT WAS NOT MATERIAL): FRESH OFF THE PRESS – JUDGMENT THIS AFTERNOON
I am grateful to Jamie Carpenter KC for drawing my attention to this judgment given this afternoon. It relates to an interesting dispute between law firms. The claimant had entered into a CFA with the defendant. The defendant argued that…
COST BITES 392 : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)
Here we have a case where both parties made Part 36 offers. The court held that the offers were ineffective. One because the offeror had not beaten their offer on a true “like-for-like” comparison. The other offer was held not…
COST BITES 391: TOO MUCH CORRESPONDENCE, GRADE C RATES NOT INCREASED AND “SO CALLED” SKELETON ARGUMENTS, WHICH REPEAT THE CONTENTS OF OVER-LENGTHY WITNESS STATEMENTS
There are some interesting observations in the short judgment on costs in this case. There was too much correspondence, “witness statements” were in reality skeleton arguments, with the contents then repeated in skeleton arguments. Furthermore a “good” Grade C is…
COST BITES 391: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION THAT SOLICITOR’S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED AT “NIL”: THERE IS NO “RESTITUTIONARY” RIGHT TO DAMAGES WHERE THE CFA ITSELF MADE EXPRESS PROVISIONS FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES
I wrote about this case in August 2025 “Here we have a case that could well bring tears to the eyes of any litigator who works on a conditional fee basis. For the second time, on appeal, the claimant solicitor’s…
THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE – LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON’T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING – IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK…)
One day the incorrect use of AI to cite “hallucinated” authorities is going to ruin someone’s career. It may have done so already, there are a number of SRA investigations pending. The example we look at here is highly educational…
COST BITES 390: THE COURT OF APPEAL, “LATE” WITNESS STATEMENTS, THE COPPERS AND THE COSTS
We looked earlier at the Court of Appeal decision yesterday in relation to relief from sanctions. Here we look at the judgment in relation to the costs of the hearing below and of the appeal itself. As we shall see…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026: NOW WITH ADDED CHECKLISTS
Allegations of undersettlement of personal injury actions are not uncommon. There is an entire industry specialising in looking at solicitor’s files. This webinar aims to help practitioners avoid such assertions and be able to provide clear and robust replies if…
COST BITES 389: THE SRA IS LIABLE TO PAY THE COSTS OF AN APPEAL WHERE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL APPELLANT ITS POSITION IS “MORE AKIN TO THAT OF A NORMAL LITIGANT”
Here we consider an issue that has some relevance to the profession as a whole. Should the SRA be liable to pay the costs of an appeal from the SDT? In this case the SRA was the instigator of the…
WEBINARS AVAILABLE ON DEMAND: WITNESS STATEMENTS; MAZUR; INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION AND PART 36: A HEADY BREW TO LIGHTEN UP ANY LITIGATOR’S DAY…
Four webinars are now available “on demand” from Civil Litigation Brief: PD57AC; Mazur in the Court of Appeal; Informing the Client about the Costs of Litigation; Part 36 recent developments. THE COSTS (The costs are £75.00 plus VAT if you…
A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER THAT GAVE A 9% DISCOUNT WAS “SOBER AND REALISTIC”: IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR THE DEFENDANT TO FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT IT
Here we have another case where the court considered an argument that it was “unjust” for an unsuccessful defendant to face the normal Part 36 consequences when they had failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer. This judgment shows…
COST BITES 387: THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION THAT THERE MUST BE A DETAILED ASSESSMENT WHERE A CASE LASTS MORE THAN ONE DAY: JUDGE SUMMARILY ASSESSES COSTS AFTER A THREE DAY HEARING
Here we have a case where there was an argument whether there should be a summary or detailed assessment. The judge made it clear that there is no presumption against summary assessment simply because a hearing lasted more than one…
A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE…
Here we are not looking at a judgment as such but the reasons for an order made yesterday in the High Court. The court struck out an action and ordered that the claimants’ solicitors pay £900,000 on account of costs. …
COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
This case is another warning to those who are thinking about issuing committal proceedings on a “tactical” basis. The judge decided that the claimant’s conduct in the bringing of committal proceedings in this matter should lead to their paying costs…
COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME
We are looking at an interesting decision in relation to the court being asked to determine preliminary issues in the provisional assessment process. The judge held that the courts have jurisdiction to determine preliminary applications and issues however it should…
COST BITES 384: THE LOSER OF AN APPLICATION USUALLY PAYS AND THERE HAS TO BE A GOOD REASON IF THEY DON’T: APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS A DECISION TO THE CONTRARY
Here we have an unusual case where, on appeal, a costs decision in favour of a defendant was overturned on the basis that that there was no good reason not to apply the normal principle that “the loser pays”. “There…
SERVICE POINTS 39: ISSUES OVER CORRECT SPANISH ADDRESS DID NOT RENDER SERVICE INVALID
Here we have a case as to service when the claimant was successful. There were issues as to service as to the correct address and the correct means of service in Spain. The claimant adduced evidence from a Spanish lawyer…
COST BITES 383: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS FOLLOWING “MIXED” SUCCESS AT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION? WHAT IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE AMOUNT? (SOMETHING ABOUT APPROPRIATE DELEGATION AND HOURLY RATES TOO…)
This judgment considers issues relating to the liability of costs, reasons why “mixed” success should lead to a reduction and the appropriate quantum for costs on a summary assessment. There are also interesting issues here in relation to hourly rates…
COST BITES 382: SHOULD THE COURT DEPART FROM THE FIXED COSTS REGIME? : “THIS HAS BECOME A COMPLEX APPLICATION…”
One of the (many) things that litigators need to keep an eye on in years to come is the circumstances in which the courts depart from fixed costs regimes. If this happens too readily then the purpose of the regime…
COST (MEGA) BITES 382: THE AMOUNT WAS “STAGGERING” BUT THE COURT CANNOT INTERFERE WITH AN ARBITRATOR’S AWARD OF $26 MILLION FOR COSTS
Anyone going through a detailed assessment of costs can look ruefully at this judgment about costs in arbitration proceedings. The arbitrator awarded $26 million in costs based on very scant information. As it turns out the courts had no power…
COST BITES 381: DOES THE COURT HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT? SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT ALONG THE WAY…
This case is interesting for several reasons. Firstly the judge considers whether the court has power to order security for costs in a detailed assessment. Secondly there are some interesting observations about the costs incurred in the assessment process (and…
THE COSTS LIABILITY OF A REPRESENTATIVE OF A DECEASED PERSON UNDER CPR 19.12 CONSIDERED: THE SITUATION IS NOT THE SAME AS AN ADMINISTRATOR OR EXECUTOR
This case considers the costs liability of a person appointed under CPR 19.12 to represent a deceased person. The court made it clear that such an appointment is not directly analogous to that of an administrator or executor. Different costs…
COST BITES 380: “ALWAYS CHOOSE A COSTS LAWYER FOR EXPERT LEGAL COSTS ADVICE”: GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA
The Solicitors Regulation Authority have sent out a short Note on selecting professional help to assess legal costs. It is worth reading. Indeed it may be regarded as essential reading. “Using an unregulated costs adviser can expose you and your…
ACTION STRUCK OUT UNDER CPR 3.4(2)(c) FOR NON COMPLIANCE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED
Here we have a reminder that failure to comply with rules and orders have consequences. In this case the consequences were that the Part 20 claimants’ action for damages was struck out. There had been a series of failures…
COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)
There is no shortage of posts about solicitor-client costs on this site (see the links section below). The Civil Justice Council have issued a Consultation Paper on reform of Part III of the Solicitors Act. “Whilst it might be expected…
COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF “COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS”: THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
There are many who have doubts, often profound doubts, about the utility of class actions where each of the recipients will recover minute sums. Those doubters will have their views compounded by the judgment in this case. The likely damages…
COST BITES 377: THE COURT WOULD NOT STAY A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PENDING THE DEFENDANT’S APPEAL AND/OR APPLICATION FOR A RIGHT TO SET OFF THEIR OWN COSTS (WHY WHAT IS TAKEN OUT OF DRAFT ORDER CAN BE AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS LEFT IN…)
Here we have an unusual issue, caused by the defendant agreeing to an unusual order (more accurately the removal of a proposed term of an order). The defendant was liable to pay the claimant’s costs of a hearing which were…
DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT
The previous post mentioned a webinar this Friday on deducting costs from the client’s damages. Right on cue this judgment occurred on that very topic. It makes some very important observations. It has created more work in preparing the webinar,…
DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE LAW AND PRACTICE: WEBINAR 24th APRIL 2026
Recent cases have shown that the issues relating to to deducting costs from the client’s damages remain controversial and highly contested. This webinar examines the regulatory framework and case law governing the deduction of legal costs from a client’s damages…
COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?
Here we have a case where a claimant who lost a case at trial (and turned down an offer of £200,000) argued that there should be no order for costs. That argument did not take it very far… “The Defendant’s…
THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS: WEBINAR 17th APRIL 2026
Last week we saw a case where, on a summary assessment, costs were reduced from £2.6 million to £750,000 on a summary assessment. Clearly not all assessments are going to involve these amounts, however the case highlights that these can…
ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?
I am grateful to my colleague Steven Turner for sending me a copy of this interesting decision which relates to Part 36, fixed costs and applications to “re-band” a case. The case may be unusual in that an application for…
PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026 (UPDATED)
Last month I wrote about the Practice Note in relation to Summary Assessments that take place in the Rolls Building from the 14th April 2026. That Practice Note was superseded by a further Practice Note issued yesterday. (In other words…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS’ BILLS
There have been a large number of posts recently relating to solicitor and own costs assessments. Many of these cases have related to the issue of whether bills delivered were “statute” bills “interim statute bills” or simply interim bills. The…
You must be logged in to post a comment.