COST BITES 57: ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE COSTS AFTER SETTLEMENT: YOU CAN’T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT (COURT OF APPEAL VERSION)
There have been some interesting decisions recently on issue based costs orders and costs not always following the event. In Tradition Financial Services Ltd v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 112 the Court of Appeal upheld a…
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER THAT CLAIMANT REDRAW BILL OF COSTS DISMISSED: EXPERIENCE OF FEE EARNERS IS A MATTER FOR THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCESS
An interesting point was considered by Costs Judge Nangalingam in Brierley v Otuo & Ors [2023] EWHC 275 (SCCO). The defendant paying party argued that a bill of costs should be redrawn. One of the grounds for the application was…
COST BITES 56: IF YOU DISCONTINUE AGAINST A DEFENDANT YOU HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS
In Lendlease Construction (Europe) Ltd v AECOM Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 2855 (TCC) Mrs Justice Joanna Smith held that a claimant that was discontinuing against one of the defendants in an action should pay the costs. There was no…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS AND COSTS 1: IMPLEMENTATION
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2023 make major changes to the rules relating to the set off of costs and QOCS, reversing the decision of the Supreme Court in Ho -v- Adelkun. Here I want to look at the rule…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND WHEN AN INVOICE WAS DOCTORED: NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE SAID WITH FLOWERS
I am grateful to barrister William Rankin for sending me a copy of the judgment of Recorder Knifton KC in Hamblett -v- Liverpool Wholesale Flowers Limited (Liverpool County Court, 23rd January 2023) a copy of which can be found here …
ITS OFFICIAL – THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER: READ IT HERE: CONTEST WINNER
Following detailed discussions by the judging panel the winner of the Wig and Pens Prize for the best costs advice has been decided. THE CRITERIA “What single piece of Advice on costs would you give to a young lawyer? …
CLAIMANT FAILS IN AN APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS AGAINST HIS OWN LAWYERS: HOWEVER THERE IS AN IMPORTANT LESSON HERE
In Costa v Dissociadid Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 49 (IPEC) the claimant was unsuccessful in an application for wasted costs against his own lawyers. However the judgment tells us more than that. It is an object lesson in the…
WHAT IS THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER? THE ENTRIES
What single piece of Advice on costs would you give to a young lawyer to stand them in good stead throughout their career? This was the question asked in the contest started last month. The contest has a prize generously…
COST BITES 55: A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER NOT MADE AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS IN RELATION TO COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: QOCS MAY BE A PROBLEM FOR THE DEFENDANT – BUT THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO SOLVE IT…
In PME v The Scout Association [2023] EWHC 158 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard rejected the defendant’s argument that a non-party costs order should be made against the claimant’s solicitors in relation to the defendant’s costs of assessment and subsequent applications…
COST BITES 54: THOSE COSTS BUDGETS MAY BE AGREED BUT THEY ARE NEITHER REASONABLE NOR PROPORTIONATE: AND THE COURT IS GOING TO SAY SO.
In Lemos & Ors v Church Bay Trust Company Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 157 (Ch) Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Jones made it clear that he did not accept the reasonableness of the costs budgets of both parties. The…
COSTS BITES 53: POSSIBILITY OF AN APPEAL AND INABILITY TO RELY ON COSTS BUDGET ARE NOT GROUNDS FOR REFUSING AN INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS
In Isaac v Tan & Anor (Re Costs) [2022] EWHC 3478 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson considered issues of costs following an unsuccessful unfair prejudice application relating to the shares of Cardiff City Football Club. He held that the application…
COST BITES 52: “WE WANT IT ALL AND WE WANT IT NOW”: COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS
One of the aims of this series is to look at those issues of costs that are, on the face of it, incidental to the main issue decided by the court. However, in practical terms, the costs issue is of…
COST BITES 51: CASE FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAST TRACK NOT SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
In Wilkins v Serco Ltd [2023] EWHC 61 (KB) Mrs Justice Heather Williams rejected the defendant’s appeal in relation to allocation of a case for false imprisonment. She upheld a finding that the case would have been allocated to the…
COST BITES 50: USEFUL LINKS ON COSTS FROM KINGS CHAMBERS: TAKE YOUR PICK…
There are a large number of helpful links on Kings Chambers’ Resource page. Here I link specifically to those relating to costs. Firstly the newsletters and articles and secondly the regular series of webinars. NEWSLETTERS Costs Litigation Newsletter:…
COST BITES 49: ARE THE COSTS OF A MEDICAL AGENCY RECOVERABLE IN THE FIXED COSTS REGIME? DISTRICT JUDGE FINDS THAT THEY ARE
Are the costs of a medical agency recoverable under the fixed costs regime? I am grateful to barrister John Meehan for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Phillips in Wilkinson-Mulvaney -v- UK Insurance Ltd (19th January…
MAKING A MISTAKE ON THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL IS NOT NECESSARILY AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: AN APPLICATION THAT PROVED COSTLY FOR THE DEFENDANT
I am grateful to Express Solicitors for sending me a report of a decision in Oxford County Court relating to the Damages Claim Portal. The claimant had used the Portal to issue against the Crown. The Portal cannot be used…
COSTS REDUCED BY 70% BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT (AFTER BEING REDUCED BY 95% DURING THE ASSESSMENT): CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED
The judgment of Mr Justice Murray in AB v Secretary of State for Justice [2023] EWHC 72 (KB) is part of an extraordinary saga in relation to a costs assessment. Costs had been reduced by 95% on assessment and reduced…
COST BITES 49: A LAWYER WHO ACTS FOR HIMSELF HAS … A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING PAID: SOLICITOR DEFENDANT CONFINED TO LITIGANT IN PERSON RATES
In Patel -v- Karmakar (12th January 2023) District Judge Lumb, sitting as a Regional Costs Judge, decided that a solicitor acting for himself in litigation could only recover the litigant in person rate. A copy of the judgment is available…
IS THE PEN MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD? WHAT IS THE BEST ADVICE ON COSTS YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER? WIN A PEN – WITH HISTORY BEHIND IT
What single piece of Advice on costs would you give to a young lawyer? What would help them throughout their career? I would be interested to know and, thanks to the generosity of David Bentley at Wig and Pens, I…
COST BITES 48: WHERE THE ONLY RELEVANCE OF THE BUDGET IS TO SET AN UPPER LIMIT ON RECOVERABLE COSTS: THE ESCALATING COSTS OF “METAPHORICAL WARFARE”
We are returning to the judgment of Costs Judge Leonard in Reed v Woodward Property Developments Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 36 (SCCO) to look at two other aspects of the case. The first relates to the relevance of the costs…
COST BITES 47: PROVING (OR DISPROVING) THAT THERE WAS A VALID RETAINER: APPORTIONING RECOVERABLE COSTS BETWEEN TWO DEFENDANTS
In Reed v Woodward Property Developments Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 36 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard considered a number of issues. Firstly the court’s approach when there was a dispute as to whether there was a valid retainer. Secondly questions…
A CAUTIONARY TALE FOR LITIGANTS: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PAY £17,500 IN COSTS IN A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK CASE
I am grateful to barrister Ashley Blood-Halvorsen for bringing my attention to the judgment of District Judge Lumb in Reed -v- Boswell (06/12/2022) a copy of which is available here. It is a rare example of costs being awarded against…
COST BITES 46: NON PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST DIRECTOR OF INSOLVENT COMPANY
In Asprey Capital Ltd v Rediresi Ltd & Anor (Re Non-Party Costs Order) [2023] EWHC 28 (Comm) Patricia Robertson KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) made a non-party costs order against a director of the defendant company. THE…
COST BITES 45: COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION THAT CASE INVOLVING A CHILD BE BUDGETED: ACCEPTS CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON COSTS – BUT NOT THE AMOUNT CLAIMED
In CXS v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 14 (KB) Master Cook considered issues relating to costs in a case concerning a child where the matter is unlikely to be resolved for many years. The Master rejected…
NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT’S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY
I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Sweeting in Robinson -v- Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust and Mercier [2023] EWHC 21 (KB), a copy of the judgment is available here. …
COST BITES 44: THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF CONDUCT, ARE PART 36 OFFERS SIGNIFICANT?
We are returning to the judgment of Mrs Justice Stacey in TRX v Southampton Football Club [2022] EWHC 3392 (KB). The judge made some observations in relation to the costs of the assessment process. In particular the interplay of CPR 47.20…
COST BITES 43: CLAIMANT’S COSTS INCURRED BEFORE CFA SIGNED WERE RECOVERABLE
In TRX v Southampton Football Club [2022] EWHC 3392 (KB) Mrs Justice Stacey considered a number of issues relating to costs. One of those was the question of whether pre-CFA costs were recoverable. This required a close consideration of the…
COST BITES 42: INDEMNITY COSTS, CONDUCT AND CORRECTING MISTAKES: PROVIDING SUFFICIENT MATERIAL ON ASSESSMENT IS ESSENTIAL
In Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc [2023] EWHC 9 (SCCO) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker held that a claimant was only entitled to 70% of its costs of assessment. There were difficulties in the way that the claimant had…
COST BITES 41: PREJUDGMENT INTEREST ON COSTS – CONSIDERED BUT REFUSED
In Adcock & Ors v Blemain Finance Ltd [2022] EWHC 3280 (SCCO) Costs Judge Whalan considered, and rejected, the claimants’ arguments that they should have pre-judgment interest on costs. “It is clear nonetheless that the incipitur rule constitutes the…
FIRST POST ON PART 36 IN 2023: IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR THE DEFENDANTS TO BEAR THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT CLAIMANTS’ PART 36 OFFER
In Von Westenholz & Ors v Gregson & Anor [2022] EWHC 3374 (Ch) Robin Vox, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, found that it was not unjust for the defendants to face the normal consequences of failing to beat…
WHEN THE DEFENDANTS FAILED TO BEAT THE CLAIMANTS’ PART 36 OFFER, BUT MONEY IS NOT DUE IMMEDIATELY: WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES?
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Hildyard in Grant & Ors v FR Acquisitions Corporation (Europe) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 3366 (Ch). Having determined that a valid and effective Part 36 offer had been made by…
COST BITES 40: NO ONE GETS THE COSTS OF AN AMENDMENT (WHICH WERE FAR TOO HIGH ANYWAY)
In Walter Hugh Merricks CBE v Mastercard Incorporated and Others [2022] CAT 52 the Competition Appeal Tribunal considered the principles relating to the costs of amendments to statements of case after a contested hearing. On the facts of this case…
QOCS PROTECTION APPLIED TO THE PERIOD BEFORE THE CLAIM WAS AMENDED TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Pathan v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2022] EWHC 3244 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne held that an action could not become subject to QOCS part way through. If the claim was a personal injury claim at trial then…
CLAIMANT’S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER DID NOT PERMIT DEFENDANT TO SET OFFCOSTS AGAINST DAMAGES: QOCS PRINCIPLES REIGN SUPREME
In Chappell v Mrozek [2022] EWHC 3147 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the defendant’s argument that the defendant’s entitlement to costs, arising from late acceptance of a Part 36 offer, could be enforced from the claimant’s damages. The judgment examines the…
TIME FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITOR’S BILL HAD NOT PASSED: CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED AND ASSESSMENT TO PROCEED
NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEAL SEE Menzies v Oakwood Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 844 In Menzies v Oakwood Solicitors Ltd [2022] EWHC 3199 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne allowed an appeal on the…
WHEN COSTS INCURRED AT A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ARE ORDERED AGAINST THE DEFENDANT: DON’T ALWAYS ASSUME IT WILL BE “COSTS IN THE CASE”
It may be imprudent to assume that arguments that take place at the case management stage will always be subject to an order for costs in the case. In University of Manchester v John McAslan & Partners Ltd & Anor…
APPLICATION FOR INDEMNITY COSTS CONSIDERED BUT NOT AWARDED: STILL A SIGNIFICANT LESSON FOR LITIGATORS (AND LITIGANTS) HERE
In Tejani v Fitzroy Place Residential Ltd & Ors (Re Costs and Interest) [2022] EWHC 3153 (TCC) Ms Vernonique Buehrlen K.C. (sitting as a High Court Judge) declined an application that an unsuccessful claimant pay the defendants’ costs on the…
COST BITES 37: DRAFTING THE SCHEDULE FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT: DEFECTS, DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES
The judgment of Tribunal Judge Amanda Brown KC in Harris v Revenue and Customs (COSTS – complex track application for idemnity costs on the basis of unreasonable behaviour – application in response to strike out for failure to meet terms…
PART 36 CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: PRE-ISSUE OFFER WAS VALID; EMAIL SERVICE DID NOT NUGATE THE OFFER: DEFENDANT TO BEAR (MOST OF) THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES
There are some interesting discussions and findings in relation to the rules relating to Part 36 offers in the judgment of Vernonique Buehrelen KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Coldunell Ltd v Hotel Management International Ltd [2022] EWHC…
KINGS CHAMBERS COSTS GROUP WEBINAR ON BELSNER: 1st DECEMBER 2022
This webinar by Kings Chambers on the 1st December 2022 gives litigators a chance to consider the practical implications of the Belsner decision. THE PRESENTERS My colleagues Craig Ralph and Andrew Hogan will consider the significance of the Belsner and Karatysz cases,…
COST BITES 36: THE POINT OF A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT IS TO REIMBURSE THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY IMMEDIATELY
In Tulip Trading Ltd v Ver [2022] EWHC 2970 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk considered the factors involved when making an interim payment on account of costs. “The point of a payment on account is to provide the successful party with…
“THERE IS NO PORTAL FOR LOW VALUE PRODUCT LIABILITY CLAIMS”: FIXED COSTS DID NOT APPLY
I am grateful to Paul Balen for sending me a case report of a product liability case he was involved in. The judge found that a product liability case is not required to be lodged in the portal. This had…
COST BITES 35: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT SUCCESS FEES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: 20% REDUCED TO 15% BY COSTS JUDGE
The judgment of Costs Judge Brown in MNO v HKC & Anor [2022] EWHC 2919 (SCCO) considers the question of an appropriate success fee between solicitor and client in a personal injury case. The judge did not accept the argument…
THE “OLD” CONDITIONAL FEE SCHEME WAS IN BREACH OF ARTICLE 6:UNINSURED DEFENDANTS NOT SENT TO COVENTRY
Amidst the bustle of recent cases about costs the European Court of Human Rights decision in Coventry v. the United Kingdom – 6016/16 may well be overlooked. The Court found that the “old” system of conditional fee litigation, whereby a defendant was…
ANALYSIS OF BELSNER 5: WANT TO SEE THE FINAL COURT OF APPEAL ORDER?
The previous post on Belsner indicated that a final order had been made by the Court of Appeal. That order can be seen here BelsnerSEALED ORDER (1) and the text is reproduced below. The interesting aspect of the order is,…
ANALYSIS OF BELSNER 4: FAIR COSTS AND LEGAL FICTION : PLUS A USEFUL WEBINAR
The latest development in Belsner v CAM Legal Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1387 is that the unsuccessful claimant has been ordered to pay £130,000 on account of costs and repay £25,000 that was previously paid to her. However, here I…
ESCAPING FIXED COSTS WEBINAR: IF YOU MISSED IT LIVE YOU CAN SEE IT HERE
I put details of this webinar up in early November. Unfortunately the event reached capacity and some people were not able to view it. However it was recorded and it is now available online here. THE WEBINAR Fixed costs…
DEFENDANT SOLICITOR IN COSTS ASSESSMENT NEED NOT RESPOND TO PART 18 REQUESTS ABOUT PREMIUMS: “THE GENERAL QUESTIONS POSED ARE A PARADIGM EXAMPLE OF A FISHING EXPEDITION”
I am grateful to Nick McDonell from Kain Knight for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge Rowley in Brown -v- JMW Solicitors LLP [2022] 2848 (SCCO). In that case the judge refused to make an order…
COST BITES 34: INTERLOCUTORY COSTS ORDERS CAN BE MADE AGAINST PARTIES WITH THE PROTECTION OF QOCS (IT IS ENFORCEMENT THAT MAY BE AN ISSUE)
In Atmani & Ors v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea & Ors [2022] EWHC 2618 (KB) Senior Master Fontaine considered the costs consequences of the decisions made in her judgment, considered in an earlier post. The Master held that…
COST BITES 33: BUDGETS: PROPORTIONALITY, COUNSEL’S FEES (“STRATOSPHERIC”, OR “ASPIRATIONAL”) THE COST OF EXPERTS AND THE COSTS OF TRIAL
There is a detailed exposition of the principles relating to costs budgeting in the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith in Various Sam Borrowers v BOS (Shared Appreciation Mortgages) No. 1 Plc & Ors [2022] EWHC 2594 (Ch). The judgment…
You must be logged in to post a comment.