Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Costs » Page 19
HOURLY RATES ALLOWED SHOULD BE INCREASED, AT LEAST, BY INFLATION: APPEAL AGAINST SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS ALLOWED.

HOURLY RATES ALLOWED SHOULD BE INCREASED, AT LEAST, BY INFLATION: APPEAL AGAINST SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS ALLOWED.

December 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I am grateful to Sean Linley for drawing my attention to the judgment of HHJ Hodge QC in  Cohen v Fine & Ors [2020] EWHC 3278 (Ch).That judgment has some interesting things to say in relation to current hourly rates…

INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER A JUDGMENT DEBTOR WAS EXAMINED: IN ADDITION THERE IS GOING TO BE A SECOND MATCH...

INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER A JUDGMENT DEBTOR WAS EXAMINED: IN ADDITION THERE IS GOING TO BE A SECOND MATCH…

November 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Shearer v Neal [2020] EWHC 3148 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC ordered that a debtor pay costs on the indemnity basis after she heard a Part 71 hearing. The case was also remitted to the High Court Judge on…

COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS AWARD FOR  AS TO COSTS ON ACCOUNT: WHAT IS A "REASONABLE SUM"? (£325,000 IN THIS CASE)

COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS AWARD FOR AS TO COSTS ON ACCOUNT: WHAT IS A “REASONABLE SUM”? (£325,000 IN THIS CASE)

November 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

In Mousavi-Khalkali v Abrishamchi & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1493 we have a rare case of the Court of Appeal considering an appeal on an order that a party pay a sum on account of costs. THE CASE The Court…

SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: THE SUBSEQUENT COSTS JUDGMENT: AN ADDITIONAL £65,095.65; INDEMNITY COSTS & INCREASED INTERESTS: THE WISDOM OF MAKING A PART 36 OFFER WHEN APPEALING

November 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

On the day when it is announced that the Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in the case of Swift -v- Carpenter it is interesting to look at the subsequent judgment on costs given today in Swift v Carpenter…

SECOND DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS CLAIMANT INCURRED IN PURSUING FIRST DEFENDANT: AN UNUSUAL CASE

SECOND DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS CLAIMANT INCURRED IN PURSUING FIRST DEFENDANT: AN UNUSUAL CASE

November 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

In Patel v Barlows & Ors (No. 2) [2020] EWHC 2795 (Ch) HHJ Mithani QC (sitting as a High Court judge) found that a defendant was liable to pay the costs of another defendant where the claimant had had to…

COSTS: "ROLLED UP" OFFER OF SETTLEMENT, INCLUDING COSTS DID NOT GIVE A DEFENDANT ANY PROTECTION

COSTS: “ROLLED UP” OFFER OF SETTLEMENT, INCLUDING COSTS DID NOT GIVE A DEFENDANT ANY PROTECTION

November 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Comberg v VivoPower International Services Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2787 (QB) contains many interesting observations in relation to damages, mitigation and costs.  Here I want to isolate one element – the fact…

THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS: THE APPLICANT HAS TO PAY THE PRICE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS: THE APPLICANT HAS TO PAY THE PRICE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

October 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Deepchand & Anor v Sooben [2020] EWCA Civ 1409 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that there be no order for costs when a party made an unsuccessful application for a non-party costs order. …

SOLICITOR'S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION

SOLICITOR’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In  Toms (t/a Goldbergs Solicitors) v Brannan [2020] EWHC 2866 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths dismissed a solicitor’s appeal against a decision that he was not able to recover costs from a client after a conditional fee agreement had been terminated….

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: NO SENSE OF PROPORTIONALITY HERE: SOME BASIC POINTS ON BILLS

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: NO SENSE OF PROPORTIONALITY HERE: SOME BASIC POINTS ON BILLS

October 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Belsner v Cam Legal Services Ltd [2020] EWHC 2755 (QB) the parties were arguing about £385.40.   The judge observed “According to their statements of costs, the Claimant and the Defendant have spent £52,575.63 and £35,139.70 respectively on this appeal. That…

THE SOLICITOR'S FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THE CLIENT TO EXPLAIN COSTS: FAILURE TO PLACE CAP ON SUCCESS FEE MEANT AGREEMENT WAS UNENFORCEABLE: HIGH COURT DECISION

THE SOLICITOR’S FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THE CLIENT TO EXPLAIN COSTS: FAILURE TO PLACE CAP ON SUCCESS FEE MEANT AGREEMENT WAS UNENFORCEABLE: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, Success Fees

In Belsner v Cam Legal Services Ltd [2020] EWHC 2755 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender allowed an appeal whereby a firm of solicitors acting on behalf of a claimant were permitted to deduct 25% of the damages in addition to payment…

DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS ON CLAIMANT'S DISCONTINUANCE:  A DEED NOT SENT IN TIME

DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS ON CLAIMANT’S DISCONTINUANCE: A DEED NOT SENT IN TIME

October 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Hewson v Wells & Ors [2020] EWHC 2722 (Ch) Master Clark varied the usual rule and made no order for costs following the claimant’s discontinuance.   “In my judgment, the change in circumstances was brought about by unreasonable behaviour…

GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES (NOT MUCH USE); CANARY WHARF (EXPENSIVE PLACE TO BE); EVIDENCE AND THE SEVEN PILLARS OF WISDOM (ALL FOR £750 AN HOUR)

GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES (NOT MUCH USE); CANARY WHARF (EXPENSIVE PLACE TO BE); EVIDENCE AND THE SEVEN PILLARS OF WISDOM (ALL FOR £750 AN HOUR)

October 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Tom Jenkinson from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Rowley in Shulman -v- Kolomoisky (24/06/20) where the issue of the guideline hourly rates was determined.  A copy of the…

WE LOST, BUT WE STILL WANT 90% OF OUR COSTS: CLAIMANT'S UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL:  A DEVELOPING FIELD OF LAW?

WE LOST, BUT WE STILL WANT 90% OF OUR COSTS: CLAIMANT’S UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL: A DEVELOPING FIELD OF LAW?

October 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Miles in Terracorp Ltd v Mistry & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 2623 (Ch) contains an interesting review of the principles relating to costs where a party has failed on a number of issues.  It…

COSTS ORDERED AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT WHEN CLAIMANT HAD SETTLED AGAINST ANOTHER:  A DEFENDANT'S UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL

COSTS ORDERED AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT WHEN CLAIMANT HAD SETTLED AGAINST ANOTHER: A DEFENDANT’S UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL

October 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Members Content

In  Oberholster v Optical Express Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2635 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman dismissed a defendant’s appeal against a costs order against it.   The case deals with the problematic issue of costs  if a claimant settles the claim…

PROPORTIONAL COSTS: THE LITIGATOR'S WATCHWORDS: 12 PRACTICAL STEPS FOR THE PRUDENT LAWYER...

PROPORTIONAL COSTS: THE LITIGATOR’S WATCHWORDS: 12 PRACTICAL STEPS FOR THE PRUDENT LAWYER…

October 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

The issue of “proportionality” is central to contemporary litigation.  However it is rarely examined in detail and rarely discussed.  Attempts to analyse how proportionality can be achieved are even rarer.   Here I reprise some points made several years ago about…

GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES CONSIDERED IN COURT OF PROTECTION: INFLATION CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ON ASSESSMENT

GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES CONSIDERED IN COURT OF PROTECTION: INFLATION CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ON ASSESSMENT

October 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In  PLK & Ors (Court of Protection : Costs) [2020] EWHC B28 (Costs) Master Whalan considered the appropriate hourly rate for Deputies in Court of Protection matters. (I am grateful to Carter Burnett, Costs Consultants, for bringing my attention to…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND WASTED COSTS AGAINST A SOLICITOR: THE BURDEN IS ON THE APPLICANT TO PROVE CAUSATION

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND WASTED COSTS AGAINST A SOLICITOR: THE BURDEN IS ON THE APPLICANT TO PROVE CAUSATION

September 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert in  Razaq v Iqbal & Ors [2019] EWHC 3924 (QB) provides an interesting example of a failure to prove causation in a wasted costs application. A solicitor had been negligent in failing to pass…

FATAL ACCIDENT: LEGAL COSTS OF ATTENDING INQUEST WERE RECOVERABLE: THE DANGERS TO DEFENDANTS OF MAKING AN EQUIVOCAL "ADMISSION"

FATAL ACCIDENT: LEGAL COSTS OF ATTENDING INQUEST WERE RECOVERABLE: THE DANGERS TO DEFENDANTS OF MAKING AN EQUIVOCAL “ADMISSION”

September 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In the judgment today in Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service v Veevers [2020] EWHC 2550 (Comm) HHJ Pearce upheld a decision that the legal costs incurred in attending an inquest were recoverable as costs in a subsequent action for…

COURT MAKES 5% REDUCTION IN SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT'S COSTS RATHER THAN AN ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER

COURT MAKES 5% REDUCTION IN SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S COSTS RATHER THAN AN ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER

September 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This is the fourth look  this blog looks at the judgment in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387.   This time we are looking at the question of whether there should be a deduction in…

DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT OF THE CASE LED TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING PAID: MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF "NOT ACTING IN GOOD" FAITH: A SPECULATIVE & WEAK CASE: EXPERTS WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT OF THE CASE LED TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING PAID: MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF “NOT ACTING IN GOOD” FAITH: A SPECULATIVE & WEAK CASE: EXPERTS WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

September 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Experts, Members Content

This is the third (but not the last) look at the judgment on costs  in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387. The judge held that the defendant’s conduct of the case was such that…

DATE ON LETTER DID NOT PREVENT IT BEING A VALID PART 36 OFFER: NO ESTOPPEL IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36 OFFERS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

DATE ON LETTER DID NOT PREVENT IT BEING A VALID PART 36 OFFER: NO ESTOPPEL IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36 OFFERS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

September 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall considered arguments relating to the validity of Part 36 offers. He found that the offer the claimant made was a valid Part…

WHEN SHOULD A LITIGATION FRIEND BE LIABLE FOR COSTS? INTERESTING COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

WHEN SHOULD A LITIGATION FRIEND BE LIABLE FOR COSTS? INTERESTING COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

August 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Glover v Barker & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 1112 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision where costs were awarded against a litigation friend.  It is a particularly important judgment for those acting as litigation friends for defendants. THE…

LEXLAW -v- ZUBERI: PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED

LEXLAW -v- ZUBERI: PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED

August 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

I wrote in July about the decision in Lexlaw Ltd v Zuberi [2020] EWHC 1855 (Ch) (10 July 2020) in relation to the validity of a damages based agreement.  Practitioners may like to know that permission to appeal has been granted by…

COSTS BUDGETING: PRECEDENT T: EXCEL VERSION

COSTS BUDGETING: PRECEDENT T: EXCEL VERSION

August 17, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful to Sean Linley for sending me an excel version of the new Precedent T. It gives me another chance to remind people of the new rules that come into force and and post photos of cars that…

SERVICE, JURISDICTION AND WASTED COSTS: A CASE TO POINT

SERVICE, JURISDICTION AND WASTED COSTS: A CASE TO POINT

August 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

We looked earlier at the judgment of Master Cook in Jovicic & Ors v The Serbian Orthodox Church-Serbian Patriarchy [2020] EWHC 2229 (QB) in relation to late service of the claim form.  That judgment also considers the wasted costs application….

SERVING THE COURT FORM (AFTER) THE LAST MINUTE: COURTING DISASTER LEADING TO A  WASTED COSTS ORDER BEING MADE

SERVING THE COURT FORM (AFTER) THE LAST MINUTE: COURTING DISASTER LEADING TO A WASTED COSTS ORDER BEING MADE

August 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Wasted Costs

The judgment of Master Cook in Jovicic & Ors v The Serbian Orthodox Church-Serbian Patriarchy [2020] EWHC 2229 (QB) provides an object lesson on the dangers of not serving the claim form well within the four month period.  The judgment…

THE NEW COSTS MANAGEMENT PRACTICE DIRECTION: COMING INTO FORCE 1st OCTOBER 2020: READ IT HERE

THE NEW COSTS MANAGEMENT PRACTICE DIRECTION: COMING INTO FORCE 1st OCTOBER 2020: READ IT HERE

August 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes

The new Costs Management Practice Direction comes into force on the 1st October 2020.   It is set out in full below.   SOME POINTS OF INTEREST The specific exclusion of cases where the claimant has a limited life expectancy (which…

COUNSEL'S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE

COUNSEL’S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE

August 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

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

CIVIL PROCEDURE (NOT-CORONAVIRUS): BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – JULY 2020

August 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Useful links

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

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

August 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

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

WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS? IT DEPENDS: COURT CONSIDERS THE RELEVANT TEST

August 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

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

“SUCCESSFUL” CLAIMANT RECOVERS 60% OF HIS COSTS BUT PAYS THE COSTS OF TRIAL: ISSUED BASED COSTS ORDERS CONSIDERED

August 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

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

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Coronavirus, Costs, Members Content

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...

THE NEW PRECEDENT T: SEE IT HERE: A MODEL OF ITS KIND…

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

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

POINTS TAKEN ON APPLICATION WERE “ALL BAD”: PARTIES TO LITIGATION ARE NOT BOUND TO TAKE BAD OR HOPELESS POINTS

July 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

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

July 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes

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

IN-HOUSE COSTS RECOVER ON ASSESSMENT: THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IS NOT BREACHED

July 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

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

GET YOUR COSTS SCHEDULES TO COURT: OR ELSE (YOU WON’T GET PAID): MAKE YOUR BED AND THEN LIE IN IT

July 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content

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

July 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Skeleton arguments

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

COSTS ISSUES IN A CASE WHERE THE CLAIMANTS HAVE TO PAY £30 MILLION: WHY IT IS UNWISE TO BANK ON WINNING

July 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Interest, Interim Payments, Members Content, Risks of litigation

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...

WHEN SHOULD INTEREST ON COSTS RUN FROM? A DECISION THAT DOESN’T GO ALL AROUND THE GARDEN…

July 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Interest, Members Content

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

VALIDITY OF A DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND CLIENT UPHELD: HIGH COURT DECISION

July 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

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

THE CAP ON RECOVERABLE COSTS OF COSTS BUDGETING IS EXCLUSIVE OF VAT: JUDGMENT TODAY

July 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

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

FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND “EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES”: A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

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

“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

July 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

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

NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER AND PART 36 BENEFITS APPLIED WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

July 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

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

JUDGMENT SET ASIDE BECAUSE OF LOCKDOWN (2): WHO PAID THE COSTS? SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE

June 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

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…

FARMER -v- THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF LANCASHIRE: COSTS DISALLOWED IN FULL: FULL JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE

FARMER -v- THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF LANCASHIRE: COSTS DISALLOWED IN FULL: FULL JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE

June 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I wrote yesterday about the two useful articles on the case of  Farmer v The Chief Constable of Lancashire [2019] EWHC B18 (Costs). The full judgment is now available on BAILLI. “Anybody around this table being of the costs persuasion…

WHEN MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT LEADS TO NO AWARD OF COSTS

WHEN MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT LEADS TO NO AWARD OF COSTS

June 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is illuminating to read two reports of the case of Farmer -v- the Chief Constable of Lancashire, where a party’s conduct on assessment led to no award of costs being made. Indeed the claimant was ordered to pay the…

THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH: CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEFS' 7th (OR 29th?) BIRTHDAY: FACTS, FIGURES AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN

THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH: CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEFS’ 7th (OR 29th?) BIRTHDAY: FACTS, FIGURES AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN

June 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

This week sees the seventh anniversary of Civil Litigation Brief as a blog.  That, it appears, is relatively young as a blog, the housing law blog Nearly Legal recently celebrated its 14th anniversary and is well into its truculent teenage…

← Previous 1 … 18 19 20 … 35 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF A CARER IN A FATAL CASE: FULL COMMERCIAL RATE APPLIED TO CLAIM FOR FUTURE LOSS OF SERVICES
  • DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW
  • SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE: SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY…
  • WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS (THERE IS NO “DEEMED ADMISSION”) PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE “HALLUCINATED” “FICTITIOUS” RULE
  • RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE…

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • 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
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • 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

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.