COUNSEL’S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE
In the judgment today in Finsbury Food Group Plc v Dover [2020] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert rejected the defendant’s arguments that counsel’s fees were not recoverable. “I do not accept that leaving the legal costs of valuing a…
CIVIL PROCEDURE (NOT-CORONAVIRUS): BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – JULY 2020
A round up of interesting posts and articles about civil procedure and costs from July 2020. Costs ACL – Gordon-Saker: Video and phone hearings will continue at SCCO after coronavirus Courts Litigation Futures – “Tsunami of post-Covid litigation” could overwhelm courts Remote…
WHEN THE FEE EARNER WITH CONDUCT OF A MATTER IS ALSO THE SOLE DIRECTOR OF THE CLIENT: UPPER TRIBUNAL AWARDS NO COSTS FOR THIS ASPECT OF THE CASE
There is a comment on costs in the judgment of Judge Timothy Herrington in Financial Solutions (Euro) Limited -v- The Financial Conduct Authority [2020] UKUT 0243 (TCC) that has some wider implications, albeit that it is was a relatively unusual…
WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS? IT DEPENDS: COURT CONSIDERS THE RELEVANT TEST
In the judgment today in Blackpool Borough Council v Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd [2020] EWHC 2128 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies, sitting as a judge of the High Court, considered the effect of a withdrawn Part 36 offer. There is an important consideration…
“SUCCESSFUL” CLAIMANT RECOVERS 60% OF HIS COSTS BUT PAYS THE COSTS OF TRIAL: ISSUED BASED COSTS ORDERS CONSIDERED
The vast majority of people who read the cases discussed in this blog will (I would wager a bet) often be thinking “Was there a Part 36 offer?” “What happened about costs?” We can get a glimpse into these issues…
HEARINGS AND DETAILED ASSESSMENTS IN THE SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE PRACTICE NOTE BY THE SENIOR COSTS JUDGE
Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker has issued a Practice Note in relation to Practice in the Senior Courts Costs Office. “Introduction 1. As a result of the hard work and determination of the court staff and the willingness to adapt…
THE NEW PRECEDENT T: SEE IT HERE: A MODEL OF ITS KIND…
I am grateful to Sean Linley for sending me a copy of the new Precedent T that will apply to amended budgets after the 1st October 2020. You can see it here. Precedent T Example THE NEW RULES…
POINTS TAKEN ON APPLICATION WERE “ALL BAD”: PARTIES TO LITIGATION ARE NOT BOUND TO TAKE BAD OR HOPELESS POINTS
The judgment of Master Davison in Vale SA v BSG Resources Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2021 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on the “state of litigation”. “The points taken on Mr Cramer’s behalf were not a mixture of…
CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN OCTOBER 2: NEW RULES AS TO COSTS BUDGETS
The 122nd update Practice Direction Amendments come into force on the 1st October 2020. Some of the changes relate to costs budgeting. We will look at these in more detail nearer the time they come into force. So that people…
IN-HOUSE COSTS RECOVER ON ASSESSMENT: THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IS NOT BREACHED
The question on the indemnity principle and in-house lawyers was another costs issue considered by Mostyn J in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin). The judge rejected an argument that the successful…
GET YOUR COSTS SCHEDULES TO COURT: OR ELSE (YOU WON’T GET PAID): MAKE YOUR BED AND THEN LIE IN IT
The judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin)has a number of elements that are of interest to costs lawyers, and litigators generally. I am going to…
COUNSEL’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER FIXED COSTS REGIME WHERE CASE SETTLED DAY BEFORE HEARING
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Haworth in Coleman -v- Townsend [SCC Senior Court Costs Office 13th July 2020). A copy of which is available here Final Judgment Coleman…
COSTS ISSUES IN A CASE WHERE THE CLAIMANTS HAVE TO PAY £30 MILLION: WHY IT IS UNWISE TO BANK ON WINNING
A reminder of the sheer size, and major dangers, of group litigation can be seen in the judgment today in Sharp & Ors v Blank & Ors [2020] EWHC 1870 (Ch). The judgment relates to the costs of the action…
WHEN SHOULD INTEREST ON COSTS RUN FROM? A DECISION THAT DOESN’T GO ALL AROUND THE GARDEN…
We looked at the decision of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in Marbrow v Sharpes Garden Services Ltd [2020] EWHC B26 (Costs) last week in relation to the question of whether the costs budgeting caps were inclusive or exclusive of VAT. There…
VALIDITY OF A DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND CLIENT UPHELD: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to Lexlaw ltd for bringing my attention to the judgment of HHJ Parfitt (sitting as a High Court Judge in Lexlaw Ltd v Zuberi [2020] EWHC 1855 (Ch) (10 July 2020). They have sent me their Note…
THE CAP ON RECOVERABLE COSTS OF COSTS BUDGETING IS EXCLUSIVE OF VAT: JUDGMENT TODAY
In Marbrow v Sharpes Garden Services Ltd [2020] EWHC B26 (Costs) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker considered the issue of whether the cap on recoverable costs of the costs assessment process are inclusive, or exclusive of value added tax. (There are…
FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND “EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES”: A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION
I am grateful to my colleague Erica Bedford for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Godsmark QC in Young -v- AXA Insurance UK Ltd, a copy of which is available here LN2018-15 Young v AXA Judgment as…
“OUR CASE WAS SO HOPELESS YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT”: LOSING PARTY SHOULD PAY THE COSTS OF CLAIMANTS PURSUING SPECULATIVE CLAIM: YOU CAN’T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT
The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert today in Bailey & Anorv Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1766 (QB) reflected the normal rule that the losing party should pay the costs of an action. In this case the losing party was…
NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER AND PART 36 BENEFITS APPLIED WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Scales v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2020] EWHC 1749 (QB) Mr Justice Cavangh rejected the defendant’s submission that there should be an issue based costs order and awarded a claimant the usual Part 36 benefits when he beat his own…
JUDGMENT SET ASIDE BECAUSE OF LOCKDOWN (2): WHO PAID THE COSTS? SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE
A post earlier today dealt with the case of Stanley v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2020] EWHC 1622 (QB) where a regular judgment was set aside because proceedings had been served, essentially, on empty offices. What will be of…