THE IMPORTANCE OF SOLICITORS’ ESTIMATES IN RELATION TO COSTS: SOME EXAMPLES WHERE PROBLEMS HAVE OCCURRED (WITH A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON THE 19th MARCH)
The recent short series on this site about the Ombudsman and estimates of costs highlighted the issues that can occur when there are disputes over costs and the original figures given by the solicitor. However the Ombudsman is not the…
PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026: COSTS SCHEDULES SHOULD BE FILED USING EXCEL SPREADSHEETS
NB THIS PRACTICE NOTE WAS REPLACED ON THE 14th APRIL – BEFORE IT WAS BROUGHT INTO FORCE – IT WAS REPLACED WITH A FURTHER NOTE, SEE THE BLOG POST HERE The Chancellor of the High Court has issued a Practice…
DECISION TODAY IN RELATION TO RECOVERABILITY AND ASSESSMENT OF FEES CHARGED BY MEDICAL REPORTING ORGANISATIONS: ANOTHER ROUND IN A VERY LONG WAR…
We are looking at another round in the ongoing “costs of medical reporting organisations” series of battles. As the judge anticipated this may well not be the last round. Here I provide a brief summary of the conclusions. A more…
COST BITES 363: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF A HEAVY COMMERCIAL APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT IN PRACTICE: £87,698 REDUCED TO £70,158.64 (BUT NOT TO £39,460): “COMPARATIVE SPEND CAN BE A CROSS-CHECK; IT IS NOT DETERMINATIVE”
We are continuing with the practice of looking at summary assessments. These receive relatively little attention, however they can play a large part in the economics of litigation. Here we see some interesting arguments in relation to hourly rates, the…
ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 3: THE COUNTY COURT HAD JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE AN ORDER FOR SALE OF MORE THAN £30,000
Does the County Court have jurisdiction to enforce an order for sale when the sums in dispute are more than £30,000? That was the issue considered here. The case is another reminder (if one were needed) about the dangers and…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 7: HEADING OFF PROBLEMS AT THE OUTSET: (WEBINAR THIS THURSDAY 19th MARCH 2026 – WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS)
This short series has aimed to highlight the ongoing difficulties that litigators, in particular, can have with giving compliant costs information to their clients. In looking at this topic it is clear that there are numerous cases where clients have…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 6: YOU SAID IT WOULD COST £2,500 – £3,000 – I’VE PAID YOU £16,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING ESTIMATES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS
This decision emphasises the fact that when giving costs estimates the solicitor should also do their best to estimate the costs of disbursements in addition to their own costs. Here the solicitor mentioned that there would be additional costs if…
COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT
An earlier post related to this case which deals with the question of whether a party should provide a breakdown of an invoice from a translator. Ben Williams KC has kindly provided me with a copy of the judgment. “In my judgment,…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 5: DISCOURAGING THE USE OF A BTE POLICY (THIS IS NOT GOOD NEWS FOR THE SOLICITOR…)
We continue with our examination of the Legal Ombudsman’s decisions about costs. The issue here was whether the solicitors were correct to discourage the use of an BTE policy and act privately taking out ATE insurance. “It is expected by…
CAN A DEFENDANT MAKE A PART 36 OFFER THAT ATTEMPTS TO BIND THE CLAIMANT IN RELATION TO MATTERS NOT PLEADED?
Here we have an interesting, and important, point about CPR Part 36. Firstly could a defendant establish that a claimant had not beaten a Part 36 offer when that offer dealt with matters that were not part of the pleaded…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 4: GOING OUTSIDE THE LEVEL OF LEGAL INSURANCE COVER
Here we are looking at a decision in relation to legal expenses insurance. The solicitor had gone outside the cover of the insurance but not informed the client. The Ombudsman’s conclusions on this issue are not a great surprise… “The…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 3: FAILURE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF FUNDING
We are continuing with our examination of Legal Ombudsman decisions on issues relating to costs. Here there was an finding of inadequate service because of a failure to consider whether the client had legal insurance that cover the costs involved….
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd has sharpened the costs risks faced by claimants who accept a Part 36 offer outside the relevant period. While a claimant who accepts late remains subject to fixed recoverable costs…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 2: POOR COSTS INFORMATION: NOT INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT COSTS UNTIL TWO YEARS INTO THE RETAINER…
We are taking a close look at several Legal Ombudsman decisions in relation to costs, more particularly information about costs in litigation. Here the firm of solicitors did not provide any information about potential costs for a year after being…
COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK
I am grateful to Andrew Hogan for sending me a copy of this decision which relates to pre-allocation costs in housing cases. It deals with the question of how the court should address pre-allocation costs where a housing disrepair claim…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 1 : WHILST COSTS CAN BE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT THE FIRM SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ESTIMATE BASED ON THEIR PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE…
We continue with our examination of recent Legal Ombudsman decisions in relation to providing estimates of costs in particular. Here we have a finding that the information given as to the costs of litigation was inadequate. “Whilst I appreciate…
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…
You must be logged in to post a comment.