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 30: OTHER PEOPLE’S BUDGETS: NONE OF THESE BUDGETS IS UNREASONABLE OR DISPROPORTIONATE
It is always interesting to look at the figures involved in relation to costs budgeting. We can see an example in the decision of Mr Roger Ter Haar KC in University of Manchester v John McAslan & Partners Ltd &…
COST BITES 29: THE PRINCIPLES OF BUDGETING CONSIDERING AND APPLIED: 15% REDUCTION TO BUDGET
In Associated Newspapers Ltd v Buckingham Group Contracting Ltd (Cost Budgeting) [2022] EWHC 2767 (TCC) Mr Roger Ter Haar KC considered principles relating to the budgeting process. He reduced a budget by 15% across the board. “In my judgment, the…
ANALYSIS OF BELSNER 3: THE COMMENTARY: A DOZEN POSTS TO THINK ABOUT
There is no shortage of commentary on the Belsner case. I have rounded up a dozen posts here. Unusually those representing both sides (and the intervenor) have given some commentary. I have set out the links below. TWO…
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…
ANALYSIS OF BELSNER 2: WELL THIS IS ALL A BIT BONKERS REALLY (2): “THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN CONTENTIOUS AND NON-CONTENTIOUS COSTS IS OUTDATED AND ILLOGICAL”
Continuing with the analysis of the judgment in Belsner v CAM Legal Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1387 we now look at the decision in relation to whether these were contentious or non-contentious costs. “the distinction between contentious and non-contentious…
ANALYSIS OF BELSNER 1: WELL – THIS IS ALL A BIT BONKERS REALLY
The first point that has to be made about the decision in Belsner v CAM Legal Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1387 relates to economics. The argument that took four days in the Court of Appeal was over a small…
COST BITES 27: WHAT DOES “PROCEEDINGS” MEAN: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL IN RELATION TO QOCS AND A MIXED CLAIM
In Achille v Lawn Tennis Association Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1407 the Court of Appeal considered the meaning of the word “proceedings” in the costs of a claimant bringing a “mixed claim” for damages. It held that it was…
SECOND COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON COSTS TODAY: A WARNING SHOT FIRED AFTER BELSNER
Fast on the heels of the judgment in Belsner today was the Court of Appeal decision in Karatysz v SGI Legal LLP [2022] EWCA Civ 1388, where a clear warning shot was fired in relation to the practice of seeking…
COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL IN BELSNER -V- CAM: DECISION CAN BE FOUND HERE
The Court of Appeal have allowed the appeal in Belsner -v- Cam Legal Services. The judgment [2022] EWCA Civ 1387 can be found here. I will conduct a detailed analysis of the decision in the near future. Here are the…
COST BITES 26: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT WAS FAR FROM PERFECT BUT DID NOT JUSTIFY AN AWARD OF INDEMNITY COSTS
In Evans v R&V Allgemeine Verischerung AG [2022] EWHC 2688 (KB) HHJ Howells (sitting as a High Court Judge) did not accept the claimant’s argument that the defendant’s conduct of the case was such that indemnity costs should be ordered….
ESCAPING FIXED COSTS: KINGS CHAMBERS WEBINAR: 2nd NOVEMBER 2022
My colleagues Andrew Hogan and Paul Hughes are presenting a webinar on the 2nd November 2022 4 – 5pm on “escaping fixed costs”. The webinar is free. Booking details are available here. NB the live event is now “full”. It…
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 24: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL AGAINST PART 7 COSTS IN CASE THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE LEFT THE PORTAL
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Lally -v- Butler (27th September 2022). The defendant successfully appealed an order that they were responsible for Part 7 costs rather…
COST BITES 23: CLAIMANT FAILS IN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY OF A SOLICITOR’S BILL OF COSTS: CHAMBERLAIN BILLS HAD BEEN SENT; A SIGNATURE ON AN EMAIL WAS SUFFICIENT; ELECTRONIC DELIVERY COMPLIED WITH THE SOLICITORS ACT
In Elias v Wallace LLP [2022] EWHC 2574 (SCCO) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker dismissed the claimant’s application for a delivery of a bill of costs. He found that (i) the bills delivered were “Chamberlain” bills and had sufficient information for…
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 21: RECEIVING PARTY NOT CONFINED TO PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT COSTS WHEN THE BILL SETTLES FOR LESS THAN £75,000: “IT WAS WITHIN THE DEFENDANT’S GIFT TO MAKE A REALISTIC PART 36 OFFER”
In UK Sovereign Investments Ltd v Hussain [2022] EWHC 2390 (SCCO)Deputy Costs Judge Campbell rejected an argument that a receiving party’s costs should be confined to provisional assessment costs when the parties had agreed those costs at £59,000. The case…
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…
COST BITES 19: JUDGE EXERCISES DISCRETION TO ALLOW CLAIMANT QOCS PROTECTION IN A “MIXED” CLAIM
In Wokingham Borough Council v Arshad [2022] EWHC 2419 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne considered whether QOCS protection should be applied to a claimant who had brought a claim for personal injury damages, in addition to other claims. The judge held…
COST BITES 18: APPROPRIATE CHARGING RATES WHEN A GRADE C IS CHARGED AT NOTHING: THE NEED FOR A “BLENDED” APPROACH
There are several interesting aspects to the judgment of Mr Justice Miles in Eurohome UK Mortgages 2007-1 Plc v Deutsche Bank AG, London Branch & Anor [2022] EWHC 2408 (Ch). One issue was the appropriate hourly rate when a grade…
COST BITES 17: FAILURE TO ENGAGE WITH CRITICISM OF WITNESS STATEMENT LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS: FAILING TO ENGAGE ON WITNESS STATEMENT ISSUES CAN BE EXPENSIVE
There is another judgment in the case of McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v Construction Industry Training Board [2022] EWHC 2361 (Ch) Richard Farnhill (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) that is worth noting. The claimant’s failure…
ASSESSMENT OF A SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT BILL OF COSTS: THREE IMPORTANT POINTS CONSIDERED: CLAIMANT’S CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITOR STRUCK OUT
In Sweeney v Wise Solicitors Ltd [2022] EWHC 2314 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley struck out a claimant’s application for an an assessment of costs against their former solicitor. The action seeking an assessment of costs was issued out of time…
COST BITES 16: THE CARE NEEDED WHEN QUANTIFYING “COSTS THROWN AWAY”: 45% OF CLAIMED COSTS TO BE PAID ON ACCOUNT
In Cabo Concepts Ltd v MGA Entertainment (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 2024 (Pat) Mrs Justice Joanna Smith considered the amount that should be ordered on account when costs were “thrown away” after an action was adjourned shortly before…
COST BITES 15: DEPARTING FROM THE GUIDELINE RATES FOR SPECIALIST WORK DONE OUTSIDE LONDON
In Lappet Manufacturing Company Ltd & Anor v Rassam & Ors [2022] EWHC 2158 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson allowed a higher hourly rate for a solicitor working outside London. The rate allowed, for a Nottingham firm, was £350 an…
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PROTOCOL LEADS TO COSTS OF A MEDICAL REPORT NOT BEING RECOVERED
I was informed recently that permission to appeal was refused in the case of Greyson -v- Fuller. I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for sending me a copy of the decision in Glendining -v- McCarthy,* where DDJ Causton…
A CLIENT DOES NOT OWE A “DUTY OF GOOD FAITH” TO A SOLICITOR ACTING UNDER A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT
In Candey Ltd v Bosheh & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1103 Lord Justice Coulson rejected an argument that a client, who has entered into a conditional fee agreement with a solicitor, owed a duty of good faith to that solicitor. …
PART 36 & COSTS: DEFENDANT COULD NOT SHOW INJUSTICE WHEN IT ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER OUT OF TIME: “PART 36 IS INTENDED TO BE A TWO-WAY STRAIGHT AND NARROW HIGHWAY”
In Holly Wright (& others) -v- Birmingham City Council District Judge Baldwin (sitting as Regional Costs Judge)* rejected an attempt by a defendant to obtain its costs where it accepted the claimants’ Part 36 offers late. The judge held that…
A COURT, ON A SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT, CANNOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF UNDUE INFLUENCE OR ECONOMIC DURESS: DEFENDANT’S SUCCESSFUL APPEAL
In Lisa Jones v Richard Slade And Company Ltd [2022] EWHC 1968 (QB) Mr Justice Johnson overturned a decision that the court, on a Solicitors Act assessment, can determine issues of undue influence or economic duress. The judge held that…
COST BITES 13: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN ACTION: TOO MANY LAWYERS, NO NEED FOR A QC
In Lenkor Energy Trading DMCC v Puri [2022] EWHC 1958 (Comm) the court carried out a summary assessment of the defendant’s costs, the grounds for the reductions are instructive. They show the grounds on which costs are reduced on assessment….
COST BITES 12: A DEFENDANT WHO IS NOT A PARTY TO AN APPEAL CAN STILL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THAT APPEAL
In Turner & Ors v Thomas & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1944 (Ch) Mr Justice Zacaroli considered the appropriate principles to be applied as to costs when a defendant was not a party to an appeal made by a co-defendant….
COST BITES 11: INTEREST ON COSTS: JUDGE FINDS IT APPROPRIATE TO BACKDATE INTEREST
In Vitol SA v Genser Energy Ghana Ltd [2022] EWHC 1955 (Comm) Ms Lesley Anderson QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered whether interest should be payable on costs from a date before judgment. She held that interest…
COST BITES 10: COURT OF APPEAL UNHAPPY AT £730,000 BILL FOR ONE DAY APPEAL: HOURLY RATES ABOVE GUIDELINES HAVE TO BE JUSTIFIED, COUNSEL’S FEES MUST BE REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE
In Athena Capital Fund SICAV-FIS SCA & Ors v Secretariat of State for the Holy See (Costs) [2022] EWCA Civ 1061 the Court of Appeal were concerned about the level of costs being claimed in a one day appeal. The…
COST BITES 9: FARES FAIR: IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS YOU CAN HAVE A “SCORE DRAW” AND EACH SIDE GETS NO COSTS
In United Trade Action Group Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Transport for London & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1026 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that there be no order for costs between the parties in judicial…
COST BITES 8: CENTRAL LONDON HOURLY RATES: THE RATE DEPENDS ON THE LITIGATION NOT THE LITIGATOR
In Brake & Anor v Guy & Ors [2022] EWHC 1911 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge). Considered the appropriate hourly rate to be applied on an application. Although costs were being assessed on an indemnity…
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…
CLAIMANT LIED ABOUT “JOB OFFER”: FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST AND LOSES £130,000
I am grateful to Aled Morris from Horwich Farrelly for sending me a transcript of the judgment of HHJ Murdock in Hawkins -v- Holmes (County Court at Leicester, 1st April 2022). It is a case where the court found the…
COST BITES 6: GETTING A SCHEDULE OF COSTS TO COURT
The claimant’s failure to provide costs schedules, and eventual compliance, can be seen in a series of judgments by HHJ Emma Kelly in cases brought by North Warwickshire Borough Council. The cases move from non-compliance to attempted compliance and eventual…
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)…
FIXED COSTS OUSTED WHEN THE PARTIES AGREE COSTS ARE TO BE THE SUBJECT OF A DETAILED ASSESSMENT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In the judgment today in Doyle -v- M&D Foundations & Building Services Limited [2022] EWCA CIV 927 the Court of Appeal found that it was possible for parties to contract out of the fixed costs provisions of the protocols. THE…
COST BITES 5: COSTS IN THE CASE APPROPRIATE ONCE A CLAIMANT HAD DISCLOSED DOCUMENTS IN RELATION TO SECURITY FOR COSTS
In Chiswick International Holdings Ltd v Oakvest Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 799 (Comm) HHJ Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the appropriate order for costs when a party had offered security in an application for security…
DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS DO NOT EXTEND TO DEFENDANTS: “HEADS I WIN TAILS YOU LOSE” ARRANGEMENTS DO NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE COURT OF APPEAL
In Candey Ltd v Tonstate Group Ltd & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 936 the Court of Appeal held that a Damages Based Agreement cannot be used between a solicitor and a defendant who did not have a counterclaim. For a…
COST BITES 4: COURT OVERTURNED NON-PARTY AGAINST LOCAL AUTHORITY IN CHILDREN CASE
In Peterborough City Council v K, L, M, N and P & Ors [2022] EWFC 61Mr Justice Poole overturned a decision making a non-party costs against a local authority. A non-party costs order could not be used as a device…
COST BITES 3: PRO BONO COSTS ORDERS EXTENDED TO TRIBUNALS
Pro bono cost orders have been extended to tribunals. The position is explained in a short post by the Access to Justice Foundation. The ability to make such orders has been extended to tribunals. GUIDANCE FROM THE ACCESS…
NINE YEARS ON V: 2018: THE GARDEN THAT COST A LOT: CLAIMANTS SOUGHT £360,000 – AND RECEIVED NOTHING… EXCEPT A BILL FOR £2 MILLION
A prominent QC tweeted recently that, when he was waiting for a court judgment to be delivered, his greatest fear was that the case would end up in the “Proving Things” series on this blog. Today we look a post…
COST BITES 2: A (PROSPECTIVE) RESPONDENT DOES NOT GET THE COSTS OF ATTENDING PERMISSION TO APPEAL HEARING
In Novartis AG & Anor v Teva UK Ltd & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 775 Lord Justice Birss refused to order costs when a respondent to an appeal attended at a permission to appeal hearing. THE CASE The judge heard…
COST BITES 1: USE OF A PARTNER IN A BOUTIQUE FIRM CAN LEAD TO LOWER COSTS
There are many cases in which judges make observations about costs which merit wider circulation. This series looks at those kinds of matters. It starts by looking at the observations of Mr Justice Foxton in Hotel Portfolio II UK Ltd…
NINE YEARS ON V: 2017: THE CLAIMANT THAT TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £1.5 MILLION AND GOT £2 INSTEAD: A LESSON FOR LITIGANTS WITH MOUTHS TOO WIDE
Choosing one case from each year is not an easy task. We have reached 2017 and I have selected two posts which relate to the same case. A claimant sought damages of £15 million but failed to prove it had…
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…
PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN EDWARDS COSTS CASE: THE TEST FOR A SECOND APPEAL WERE NOT SATISFIED
In May I reported on the decision in Edwards (& others) -v- Slater and Gordon UK Limited [2022] EWHC 1091. There was an application for permission to appeal that judgment. Permission was refused. Full details can be found here THE CASE…
You must be logged in to post a comment.