COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD
It is a busy day for Court of Appeal decisions on procedure. Here we have an important judgment on Part 36. What are the costs consequences if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer when the case is subject to…
WEBINAR ON PART 36: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”: WATCH IT WHEN AND WHERE YOU WANT…
I have had some enquiries about whether the webinar given today on Recent Developments in Part 36 is available this webinar is available “on demand. It is now available – the details are available here. (The CLB Member discount…
COST BITES 360: THE COURT DOES HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: HOWEVER IT MADE AN ORDER FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT INSTEAD
Here we have a case that it about the complex “fall out” following funding of litigation by litigation funders. The claimant sought an assessment of costs on the basis that it may have an interest in the sums being sought….
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD – DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)
The Court of Appeal has heard an appeal against the decision in Laura Attersley v UK Insurance Limited [2025] EWHC 884 (KB). This is an interesting decision on Part 36. I understand that judgment is pending. This was one of many…
COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR’S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY…)
Here we have an appeal by a paying party on a highly technical point. The appeal failed. It highlights the dangers of (i) permitting a default certificate to be entered; (ii) taking technical points which (as the Court observed) led…
COST BITES 358: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE PARTIES HAVE COMPROMISED AN APPLICATION BUT CANNOT AGREE ON WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS?
There are occasions where the parties agree the terms of an application but cannot agree who should pay the costs – the court is asked to adjudicate. There are difficulties for the judge in this situation. In particular judges are…
COST BITES 359: FAILING TO SIGN CONSENT ORDER LEADS TO £44,000 IN COSTS: “GOING SILENT” IS NOT A CHEAP OPTION…
Just a quick warning here about the costs of not signing a consent order having agreed to so something. It can be expensive. We have a case here where it cost £44,000 when the claimant made an application because the…
COST BITES 358: JUDGE DOES NOT AWARD COSTS ON AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT (INITIALLY) ASKED FOR TOO MUCH
It is not unusual for a party, on an interlocutory application, to put in a schedule of costs that covers the entire action. Sometimes this is justified, often it is not. Here we have a case where this backfired. The initial…
![PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER - YES THEY CAN]](https://i0.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Par36Interest.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER – YES THEY CAN]
The judgment here considers an interesting point in relation to Part 36. The judge had, in the substantive judgment, considered issues relating to the interest to be paid by the defendant. The defendant had failed to beat a Part 36…
MEMBER NEWS: USEFUL LINKS: REMEMBER TO LOOK AT THE END OF THE POST: A REMINDER OF MEMBER DISCOUNTS
There have been developments on this site that readers should be aware of. Firstly the development of the “useful links” at the end of each post. Secondly the discount codes for webinars taking place over the next few weeks. …
COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED…)
I am grateful to Ben Williams KC for sending me a note of the judgment yesterday which was the appeal against the decision in Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025). The second time…
COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE “AT LARGE”
Here we are considering a Court of Appeal decision about what costs order should be made when an action is transferred from a fixed costs regime to one where costs are at large. On the face of it the decision…
COST BITES 355: VARYING A BUDGET (3): PROPOSED VARIATIONS DISALLOWED BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MADE “PROMPTLY”
This is the final part of today’s trilogy considering applications to vary costs budget. We have already seen that the judge determined that many issues in the case were “significant developments” which could, in theory, lead to a variation of…
COST BITES 354: VARYING A BUDGET (2) HOW WAS THE ISSUE OF “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” CONSIDERED IN PRACTICE?
The previous post looked at the judge’s consideration of the principles relating to variations in a costs budget. Here we look at how this worked out in practice with the judge considering whether various issues amounted to “significant developments”. Some…
COST BITES 353: VARYING A COSTS BUDGETS (1): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED: WHAT IS MEANT BY “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS”?
We are taking a detailed look at a judgment that deals with proposals to vary costs budgets. This post will look at the judge’s considerations of the rules, principles and guidance that relates to variation of budgets. Later posts will…
COST BITES 352: S.106 OF THE PATENTS ACT HAS NO IMPACT UPON THE COURT’S DECISIONS IN RELATION TO COSTS BUDGETING
There are several interesting issues raised in this judgment. The fundamental point is whether the costs budgeting exercise is an “award of costs or expenses”. The judge decided that it is not. This, in turn, had an impact upon whether…
COST BITES 351: WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE COSTS BUDGETS IN PRACTICE? “COMPARE AND MATCH” IS NOT ALWAYS AN ACCURATE GUIDE:THE KEY QUESTION IS – WHO WILL BE DOING THE MOST WORK?
The previous post looked at the judge’s general observations in this case. Here we look how those principles were applied in practice. It is clear that the arguments that the costs were excessive by way of comparison did not always…
COST BITES 350: KNOWING HOW JUDGES APPROACH BUDGETING WHEN ONE SIDE SEEKS MUCH MORE THAN ANOTHER: IS THE COURT A “SLAVE TO COMPARISON”?
It is always important, and enlightening, to have a close look at judicial observations on the nature of costs budgeting. We have a useful judgment here. The judge considered the applicable principles and guidance before carrying out budgeting in a…
COST BITES 349 : THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED 100% OF THEIR COSTS: THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL WAS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR
It is rare for the Court of Appeal to overturn a first instance decision as to costs. We see an example of this happening here. The Upper Tribunal awarded the claimant 75% of his costs of a judicial review application…
COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR
There is an interesting comment at the end of the judgment. The judge made an order for security for costs. However he also expressed concern that the defendant’s estimated costs did not include anything in relation to the costs of…
MEMBER NEWS: A REMINDER OF MEMBER BENEFITS AND WHERE TO FIND THE DISCOUNT CODES: ESSENTIAL TOPICS COVERED IN WEBINARS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR
A reminder that member subscribers have access to discounts on webinars being presented throughout the year. The details of the webinars, the discounts and how to find the discount codes are below. The first webinar sets out the practical consequences…
WHEN PERMISSION IS (AND IS NOT) REQUIRED TO DISCONTINUE A CLAIM BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF MINORS: IT STILL HAS SERIOUS COSTS CONSEQUENCES THOUGH
Here we are looking at an interesting issue relating to discontinuance. In some circumstances a claim brought by a minor or protected party cannot be discontinued without the court’s permission; in other circumstances no permission is required. The distinction is…
COST BITES 347: CLAIMANTS FAILURE TO “CUT THEIR CLOTH” MEANT COSTS OF BUDGETING PROCESS WERE REDUCED BY 20%
We have seen several cases where an “overambitious” costs budget has led to a reduction or disallowance in the costs of budgeting. We have another example here. The claimants were effectively given a second chance to produce budgets having had…
COST BITES 346: CONDUCT, “PART 36 OFFERS” AND THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ON A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: THE COSTS OF “ASSESSMENT” ARE DISTINCT TO THE COSTS OF “PROCEEDINGS”
In this judgment given yesterday a Costs Judge considered the relevance of conduct in a Solicitors Act assessment. In particular whether an offer expressed as a “Part 36 offer” by the claimant client could amount to “special circumstances” to displace…
COST BITES 345: RECEIVING PARTY’S FAILURE TO FILE ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT RENDERS THE ASSESSMENT A NULLITY: CLEVER AND COMPLEX ARGUMENTS DID NOT PREVAIL
What are the consequences if a party lodging the documents for a provisional assessment of costs fails to file all the relevant documents and the assessment goes ahead without the judge seeing all the points of dispute? . This is…
COST BITES 344: INSOLVENCY COURT HAS POWER TO MAKE A PRO BONO COSTS ORDER FOR THE COSTS OF COUNSEL: POINTS TO WARN ABOUT IF YOUR OPPONENTS ARE ACTING ON A PRO BONO BASIS
We have looked at pro bono costs orders several times. This case has an unusual twist in that the case was an insolvency case. The judge considered the Insolvency Rules and found that the court had power to make an…
COST BITES 343: AN OPPORTUNITY HAVE A CLOSE LOOK AT A CASE BEING BUDGETED: “I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE OVERALL FIGURE PUT FORWARD IS PRIMA FACIE DISPROPORTIONATE”
It is not often we get a chance to look at a budgeting decision. These cases are interesting and important because they show some light on the process. They also show the factors the courts consider when undertaking the budgeting…
COST BITES 342: THE CLAIMANTS’ HYPERBOLIC APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT COST THEM DEARLY: PERSONAL LIABILITY FOR £132,400 FOLLOWING THEIR CHALLENGE OF A BILL OF £147,436.33
If a case were needed to warn about the dangers of litigation this is one of them. The claimants challenged a solicitor’s bill of £147,436.33, the bill was reduced by some £18,000 (less than the solicitor had offered to settle…
PART 36: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: DETAILS OF THE WEBINAR ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2025
A working — indeed, a detailed — knowledge of how Part 36 operates in practice is essential for all litigators. Although it is famously described as a “self-contained code”, it is a code whose application continues to develop, often in…
COST BITES 341: THIS ASSESSMENT SHOULD NOT LAST 50 DAYS: COURT OF APPEAL ADVOCATES “SAMPLING” APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT OF £44 MILLION BILL OF COSTS
It is rare for a court, particularly the Court of Appeal, to take one step aside from the issue being determined and make some general observations on the process of the assessment of costs. This is one of those rare…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 52 : IF THE DEFENDANTS WERE PLEADING THAT INVIDIVIDUALS WERE INVOLVED IN POSITIVE DECEPTION THEN THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLEADED
Here we have a case where the judge found that the defendants’ case was pleaded in such a way that it did not allow them to make specific allegations of deception about particular individuals. If the defendants had a case…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: APPLYING TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: WHAT YOU NEED TO SHOW
What does an applicant need to show if it wants to persuade the court to vary an existing costs budget? There was a helpful summary of the principles set out in a case we looked at last week. An application…
YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT “FUNCTUS OFFICIO”
Here we have an ingenious argument that a court could not claim a higher court fee. It was an ingenious argument that failed. This shows the importance of claimants knowing the value of a case when they issued, and the…
PART 36 OFFERS ON COSTS: JUDGE ALLOWS DEFENDANT’S APPEAL: THE OFFER HAD NOT BEEN BEATEN, THE COSTS OF PREPARING THE BILL WERE NOT RECOVERABLE
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of this decision which highlights an important issue in relation to Part 36 and the assessment of costs. At first instance a Deputy District Judge found that the…
MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”
The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies” from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES (JANUARY 2020): 30 MINUTES WAS NOT REALLY LONG ENOUGH: REVISITING THE PREVIOUS POSTS
The issue of time estimates has been a regular source of posts for this site. This provides an opportunity to look at the judge’s observations that the original time estimate of 30 minutes before the District Judge was inadequate. We…
COST BITES 340: CLAIMANTS’ CONDUCT, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND EFFECTIVE REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS
Here we have a case where the claimants were (largely) successful but the court made no order for costs between the parties. There were three major factors (i) the way in which the claimants conducted the action; (ii) the failure…
COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR’S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION
There are many lessons to learn from this case: (i) the nature, extent and power of the Legal Ombudsman; (ii) the importance of transparency and accuracy when giving an estimate as to fees, particularly in litigation (iii) the very limited…
COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT’S HAD AN “ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION”
We have looked many times at cases where the courts have considered whether or not costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis. I do not recall a judgment where the judge has decided this issue so emphatically. There were…
COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES” UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT
A client has a limited amount of time to challenge a solicitor’s bill. If the bill is challenged 12 months after delivery or payment then the power to order assessment can only be exercised if the court accepts that there…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T HAVE THEM
The next webinar in the “Avoiding the Pitfalls” series is a 90 minute long webinar on the 6th February 2026. The webinar examines the most common procedural problems and practical difficulties that arise in civil litigation. It explores where and…
COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET
Here we have a detailed analysis of a defendant’s application to vary (that is more than double) its original costs budget. At the PTR stage the defendant applied to double its costs budget, some of this was allowed, most was…
ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE…
A party seeking an injunction is usually required to give an undertaking as to damages. That undertaking normally extends to the defendants/respondents to the injunction. However the terms of the injunction often give third parties affected by the injunction a…
SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A “FORMIDABLE BURDEN”
A litigant who fails to beat a Part 36 offer can normally expect to face the consequences set out in the rules. There is an exception if that litigant can satisfy the court that it is “unjust” for those consequences…
PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF “21 DAYS” ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES…
We have seen numerous cases on this blog where matters have been left the “last minute” and the rules as to the calculation of time become important. Here we have an interesting example in relation to Part 36. An offer…
COST BITES 335: DID FIXED COSTS APPLY? THE EXCEPTIONS, THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECT OF PART 36 CONSIDERED
I am grateful to Aofie Murphy from Brabners for sending me a copy of this judgment this morning. It relates to fixed costs (i) the exceptions; (ii) the transitional provisions; (iii) whether a Part 36 offer displaced them. It has…
THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR – CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE
Here we are looking at a case that bristles with issues both in relation to solicitor and own client costs, but also in relation to civil procedure and compliance with court orders. It serves as a reminder that a client…
COST BITES 334: CAN A CLAIMANT OBTAIN INTEREST ON COSTS EVEN WHEN COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BECAUSE THE MATTER IS FUNDED BY USING A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT?
This case considers an interesting question as to costs. Should the court award the claimants interest on costs where, in fact, they have not incurred any costs because the matter is being conducted by using a CFA? “As a…
COST BITES 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
We are returning to a point that can easily be overlooked by a party that has been successful at a split trial or a trial of a preliminary issue. Although the court may make an order in that party’s favour,…
COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION – AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A “CAUTIOUS APPROACH” TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EVIDENCE
This judgment given today contains a number of important points in relation to costs. The headline point is obviously an interim award of £43 million was made. This was actually less than 50% of the sum being sought. One of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.