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 22
A CASE WHERE LAWYERS BECOME RESPONDENTS TO THE ACTION WHERE A PARTY IS SEEKING TO RECOVER COSTS: ALSO WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE

A CASE WHERE LAWYERS BECOME RESPONDENTS TO THE ACTION WHERE A PARTY IS SEEKING TO RECOVER COSTS: ALSO WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE

April 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Technically speaking, the judgment of Mrs Justice Andrews in Willers v Joyce & Ors [2019] EWHC 937 (Ch) is about the “without prejudice” rule. However the point that has caught everyone’s attention is the fact that lawyers, previously  acting for…

THE ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT  WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE EARLIER THE BETTER (PARTICULARLY IF IT COSTS SOMEONE £7.5 MILLION)

THE ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE EARLIER THE BETTER (PARTICULARLY IF IT COSTS SOMEONE £7.5 MILLION)

April 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Snowden in  Davey v Money & Anor [2019] EWHC 997 (Ch) will, no doubt, be read anxiously by all litigation funders. The judge held that the “Arkin cap” – a limit on the liability of…

FIXED COSTS, CASES OVER £25,000, EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASKET OF CASES

FIXED COSTS, CASES OVER £25,000, EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASKET OF CASES

April 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In Ferri v Gill [2019] EWHC 952 (QB)Mr Justice Stewart considered the relevant criteria to be applied when a claimant argued that fixed costs should not be applied to a case that had started in the portal but was settled…

FIXED COSTS WHEN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION SETTLES FOR MORE THAN £25,000: "NEW RULES" TO BE APPLIED AND FIXED COSTS APPLY

FIXED COSTS WHEN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION SETTLES FOR MORE THAN £25,000: “NEW RULES” TO BE APPLIED AND FIXED COSTS APPLY

April 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to  Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose TTKW  for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Sephton QC in  Lovatt -v- Lew Diecastings Ltd (County Court in Manchester, 4th December 2018).  Lovatt v LEW Diecastings Ltd…

COURT FEE REMISSION: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

COURT FEE REMISSION: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

April 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Useful links

The earlier post reporting that a defendant had been ordered to pay the claimant’s court fees despite the claimant being entitled to remission has led to a lot of discussion on Twitter. Responses range from “that’s right” to “what on…

BARRISTERS' FEES ARE "PROPERTY": COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY (A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE TOO...)

BARRISTERS’ FEES ARE “PROPERTY”: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY (A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE TOO…)

April 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Gwinnutt v George & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 656 the Court of Appeal held that a barrister’s fees (paid under the old pre-contractual arrangements) were, in fact,  “property” (at least for the purpose of insolvency).  There is also an…

ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COURT FEES SENT TO COVENTRY

ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COURT FEES SENT TO COVENTRY

April 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

I am grateful to Michael Fletcher from Glaisyers Solicitors LLP for sending me a copy of a note of a judgment from Coventy County Court yesterday in  Cook -v- Malcolm Nicholls Limited.  It is a case concerning whether the claimant…

LIMITS ON THE DUTY OF COUNSEL TO ADVISE ON COSTS AND FUNDING: ALSO PARTICULARS OF CLAIM - IF YOU CAN'T PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY ITS PROBABLY INDICATIVE OF A POOR CASE

LIMITS ON THE DUTY OF COUNSEL TO ADVISE ON COSTS AND FUNDING: ALSO PARTICULARS OF CLAIM – IF YOU CAN’T PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY ITS PROBABLY INDICATIVE OF A POOR CASE

April 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Striking out

The judgment in Andrews & Ors v Messer Beg Ltd [2019] EWHC 911 (Ch) contains an interesting discussion on a barrister’s duty to advise on the funding of litigation.  The Part 20 claimant, having had the particulars of claim struck out, …

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHERE MONEY PAID 17 HOURS LATE:"A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NECESSARY"

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHERE MONEY PAID 17 HOURS LATE:”A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NECESSARY”

April 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Summary assessment,

In Khandanpour v Chambers [2019] EWCA Civ 570 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in relation to a refusal to give relief from sanctions.  A delay in payment of 17 hours of part of the moneys ordered by the…

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

April 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision on a solicitor and own client assessment that the additional liability in a simple personal injury case should be 15%. It allowed…

COSTS, MEDICAL AGENCIES, VAT:  SOLICITORS CAN RECOVER VAT PAID TO MEDICAL AGENCIES ON ASSESSMENT

COSTS, MEDICAL AGENCIES, VAT: SOLICITORS CAN RECOVER VAT PAID TO MEDICAL AGENCIES ON ASSESSMENT

April 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In British Airways Plc v Prosser [2019] EWCA Civ 547 the Court of Appeal considered whether it was appropriate for a claimant’s solicitor to recover the costs of VAT paid to medical agencies. THE CASE The claimant succeeded in a…

DEPARTING FROM THE BUDGET: IMPORTANT DECISION ON APPEAL: JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE

DEPARTING FROM THE BUDGET: IMPORTANT DECISION ON APPEAL: JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE

March 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Both Professor Dominic Regan and Acumension have kindly sent me copies of the decision in Barts Health NHS Trust -v-Salmon an appeal in relation to costs budgeting (HHJ Dight CBE, with Master Brown as an assessor, 17th January 2019).  A copy…

"PLEADINGS THAT ARE OF SUCH DISPROPORTIONATE LENGTH AND DENSITY": "THE CLAIM BECAME IMPENETRABLE AND UNNECESSARILY EXPENSIVE TO DEAL WITH"

“PLEADINGS THAT ARE OF SUCH DISPROPORTIONATE LENGTH AND DENSITY”: “THE CLAIM BECAME IMPENETRABLE AND UNNECESSARILY EXPENSIVE TO DEAL WITH”

March 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Galazi& Anor v Christoforou & Ors [2019] EWHC 670 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered the costs consequences of amendment and the effective discontinuance of certain causes of action.  There are two particular aspects of the judgment of general interest. Firstly…

WHO HAS WON AND WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? WHEN “WHO PAYS THE CHEQUE” IS NOT A SUFFICIENT ANSWER

March 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Hamad M Aldrees & Partners v Rotex Europe Ltd [2019] EWHC 526 (TCC)  Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart considered a case where it was far from clear that the “winning” party should recover its costs,  The case is useful in that it…

INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD

INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD

March 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Jim Gladman from Switalskis, solicitors for sending me a copy of the approved judgment of HHJ Robinson in I -v- Hull & East Yorkshire NHS Trust (25th February 2019).  A copy of that judgment is available…

WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: A "CUT OUT AND KEEP" GUIDE: A JUDGMENT ON INTEREST OF INTEREST

WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE: A JUDGMENT ON INTEREST OF INTEREST

March 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in Assetco Plc v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2019] EWHC 592 (Comm) provides a helpful review of the principles and authorities relating to the approach to be adopted when a claimant beats their own Part…

"THE CLAIMANTS MUST RUE THE DAY THEY REJECTED THE DEFENDANT'S OFFER": CLAIMANT TO PAY STANDARD COSTS AFTER REJECTING VERY EARLY PART 36 OFFER

“THE CLAIMANTS MUST RUE THE DAY THEY REJECTED THE DEFENDANT’S OFFER”: CLAIMANT TO PAY STANDARD COSTS AFTER REJECTING VERY EARLY PART 36 OFFER

March 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The costs judgment in  Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn [2019] EWHC 369 (TCC) is probably a judgment that should be shown to all litigants.  The claimant rejected an offer of £25,000 and failed to beat that offer at trial.   The defendant’s…

PROVING THINGS 144: THAT TEMPTATION TO PUT MATTERS IN THE SKELETON THAT AREN'T ESTABLISHED BY THE EVIDENCE: ALSO - THE POWER OF LISTS

PROVING THINGS 144: THAT TEMPTATION TO PUT MATTERS IN THE SKELETON THAT AREN’T ESTABLISHED BY THE EVIDENCE: ALSO – THE POWER OF LISTS

March 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Written advocacy

We have looked before at attempts to use a skeleton argument to introduce evidence (often made in desperation to be fair). An example of this can be seen in a short passage in the judgment in Schettini v Silvestri & Ors…

TERMINATING A CFA WITH GOOD REASON: NO NEED FOR SOLICITORS TO WAIT FOR GODOT: ADVICE ABOUT "SETTLEMENT" COVERS THE MAKING OF AN OFFER

TERMINATING A CFA WITH GOOD REASON: NO NEED FOR SOLICITORS TO WAIT FOR GODOT: ADVICE ABOUT “SETTLEMENT” COVERS THE MAKING OF AN OFFER

March 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Butler v Bankside Commercial Ltd [2019] EWHC 510 (QB) Mr Justice Turner upheld a decision of Master Yoxall holding that a client was liable to pay their solicitor’s costs after a conditional fee agreement came to an end when the…

AGENCY FEES ALLOWED ON APPEAL:  FULL COPY OF JUDGMENT AVAILABLE

AGENCY FEES ALLOWED ON APPEAL: FULL COPY OF JUDGMENT AVAILABLE

March 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Paul Hughes for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Graham Wood QC in Beardmore -v- Lancashire County Council.  The case considers the paying, and cost, of medical agency fees. A copy of…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

February 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post looked at the witness evidence of some of the claimants against one of the defendants in the case of Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC).  Here we look at the…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT DID NOT CONTINUE AFTER A SOLICITOR HAD CEASED TO ACT: DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS TO FIRST SET OF SOLICITORS

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT DID NOT CONTINUE AFTER A SOLICITOR HAD CEASED TO ACT: DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS TO FIRST SET OF SOLICITORS

February 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose TTKW for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Wulwik in Roman -v- AXA Insurance PLC (13/12/2018).   Roman v AXA Insurance [2018] (1) The judge found that a CFA with…

WHEN YOU'VE SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY ON LEGAL COSTS: NO REMEDY AVAILABLE: LITTLE SYMPATHY WHEN YOUR NET INCOME IS THE SAME AS A CIRCUIT JUDGE

WHEN YOU’VE SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY ON LEGAL COSTS: NO REMEDY AVAILABLE: LITTLE SYMPATHY WHEN YOUR NET INCOME IS THE SAME AS A CIRCUIT JUDGE

January 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

This blog usually looks at family cases in the context of evidence or costs.  The decision in Daga v Bangur [2018] EWFC 91 has a salutary tale to tell in relation to costs. There is also an interesting comparison in relation…

DETAILED ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT OVERSTEP THE MARK: THE COURTS WILL NOT (GENERALLY) REVISIT MATTERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE CASE ON ASSESSMENT

DETAILED ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT OVERSTEP THE MARK: THE COURTS WILL NOT (GENERALLY) REVISIT MATTERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE CASE ON ASSESSMENT

January 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting and important  judgment by Deputy Master Friston in  Andrews v Retro Computers Ltd [2019] EWHC B2 (Costs) which highlights the dangers of attempting to use detailed assessment as a means of challenging the receiving party’s conduct.   I…

COURT DID NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO POSTPONE THE PAYMENT OF COSTS: THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT OBTAIN SECURITY FOR COSTS BY OBTAINING AN ORDER DEFERRING PAYMENT OF COSTS

COURT DID NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO POSTPONE THE PAYMENT OF COSTS: THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT OBTAIN SECURITY FOR COSTS BY OBTAINING AN ORDER DEFERRING PAYMENT OF COSTS

January 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Security for Costs

There is an interesting decision today in JSC VTB Bank v Skurikhin & Ors [2019] EWHC 69 (Comm), Andrew Henshaw QC, sitting as a Judge of the High Court. The court refused to delay payment of costs to a defendant…

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST INSURER: UNTANGLING THE WEB

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST INSURER: UNTANGLING THE WEB

January 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Various Claimants v Giambrone & Law (a firm) & Ors [2019] EWHC 34 (QB) a non-party costs order was made against the defendant insurers.  It provides a (fairly complex) example of a court determining a non-party order. This “summary procedure”…

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL IN THE COUNTY COURT

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL IN THE COUNTY COURT

January 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Ho v Adelekun [2019] EWCA Civ 1988, see the discussion here.  I am grateful to Sam Hayman and Tom Jenkinson  from Bolt Burdon Kemp  for sending me a copy…

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL

January 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In November last year I wrote about the case of Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB).  This was a case in which the defendant refused to pay cost incurred prior to issue. Proceedings were issued and…

CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS: DOESN'T GET ADDITIONAL 10%: "UNJUST" CONSIDERED

CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS: DOESN’T GET ADDITIONAL 10%: “UNJUST” CONSIDERED

December 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL, SEE THE POST CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL IN RECOVERING ADDITIONAL 10% IN DAMAGES WHEN OWN OFFER WAS BEATEN: THE ADDITIONAL AWARD SHOULD NOT BE CATEGORISED AS A “BONUS” A claimant who beats their own…

UNANTICIPATED SIZE OF DISCLOSURE WAS AN "UNANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT": UPWARD REVISION OF COST BUDGET ALLOWED

UNANTICIPATED SIZE OF DISCLOSURE WAS AN “UNANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT”: UPWARD REVISION OF COST BUDGET ALLOWED

December 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Disclosure, Members Content

In  Al-Najar & Ors v The Cumberland Hotel (London) Ltd [2018] EWHC 3532 (QB) Master Davison allowed an upward variation of the cost budget.  The scale of disclosure given by the defendant could not have been anticipated and it was reasonable…

BACK TO BASICS 19: COSTS BUDGETING WHEN CASE IS MORE THAN £25,000 BUT LESS THAN £50,000

BACK TO BASICS 19: COSTS BUDGETING WHEN CASE IS MORE THAN £25,000 BUT LESS THAN £50,000

December 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

There are special rules governing budgets in cases where the claimant claims more than £25,000 but less than £50,000.  Firstly the budget has to be filed much earlier. Secondly the budget “must” only be the first page of Precedent H….

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Parties to actions

An earlier post dealt with the judgment in  McDermott -v- Inhealth Limited (19/07/2018) in relation to costs liability when a claimant settled against some, but not all, defendants in a clinical negligence case. That judgment was sent to me by Thomas Riis-Bristow, Associate…

COSTS AND "ABSURD" CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION...

COSTS AND “ABSURD” CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION…

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

This blog rarely looks at family cases. When it does it is often in relation to costs.  Which is why the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in ABX v SBX [2018] EWFC 81 caught my eye. It raises one fundamental dilemma…

"THIS IS AN ARCHETYPAL CASE WHERE IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS": ANOTHER LATE COSTS BUDGET CASE

“THIS IS AN ARCHETYPAL CASE WHERE IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS”: ANOTHER LATE COSTS BUDGET CASE

December 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment OF Mr Justice Bryan  in BMCE Bank International Plc v Phoenix Commodities PVT Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3380 (Comm) provides, as the judge noted, an archetypal example of the way not to go about cost budgeting, coupled with…

THE ASSIGNMENT  (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER'S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN

THE ASSIGNMENT (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER’S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN

December 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC 3322 (QB) the proposed appellant did not get permission to appeal against a decision that an assigned (or novated) CFA remained valid. THE CASE The claimant argued that conditional fee agreements he had…

BACK TO BASICS 17: WHEN SHOULD A COST BUDGET BE FILED: WHERE THINGS GO WRONG

BACK TO BASICS 17: WHEN SHOULD A COST BUDGET BE FILED: WHERE THINGS GO WRONG

December 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

This may appear very basic. However I have seen both sides falling foul of this very recently. In particular the fact that the budget has to be filed with the directions questionnaire when the claim is limited to £50,000. THE…

COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES "OPEN" IS INAPPROPRIATE

COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES “OPEN” IS INAPPROPRIATE

November 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful  Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp to for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Jacobs in Yirenki -v- Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 3102 (QB).  The judge allowed an appeal against a cost budgeting…

RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: "NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE"

RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: “NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE”

November 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are interesting (and important) observations on the running up of costs in the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in WG v HG [2018] EWFC 70.  This blog does not normally follow family law cases. However the question of costs is…

THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT

THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT

November 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

There is an interesting judgment in Britned Development Ltd v ABB AB & Anor [2018] EWHC 3142 (Ch) which should be read by anyone thinking of withdrawing a Part 36 offer.   The defendants in this case made a Part 36 offer…

SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE GUIDE 2018

SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE GUIDE 2018

November 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

The new Senior Court Costs Office Guide has been published. This replaces the 2013 version with immediate effect. It is available on the link in the page here. The new guide Deals with all changes since 2013. Deals with the electronic…

THE COURT CAN (AND IN THIS CASE SHOULD) ORDER ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR COSTS

THE COURT CAN (AND IN THIS CASE SHOULD) ORDER ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR COSTS

November 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to solicitor Shimon Goldwater  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder in Mayr -v- CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3093 (Comm).  It relates to the principles to be applied when…

COURT HAS NO POWER TO MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS ON ACCOUNT AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

COURT HAS NO POWER TO MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS ON ACCOUNT AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content, Part 36

NB THIS DECISION WAS NOT ACCEPTED AND EFFECTIVELY OVERRULED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Global Assets Advisory Services Ltd & Anor v Grandlane Developments Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1764. It was held that the court does have a…

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Brown in Whitaker v Richard Slade & Company Plc [2018] EWHC B17 (Costs) may have some interesting implications for solicitor and own-client costs.  In particular the finding that an agreement in relation a specific sum for work…

DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE

DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

I am grateful to Barrister Kevin Latham for sending me details of the decision of HHJ Venn in Waring -v- McDonell [2018] EW Misc B11 (CC). A link to the full decision is also available at the foot of Kevin’s…

RESPONDENTS ALLOWED TO COMMENT AT HEARING : NEVERTHELESS SURVIVES A COSTS ORDER ON APPEAL

RESPONDENTS ALLOWED TO COMMENT AT HEARING : NEVERTHELESS SURVIVES A COSTS ORDER ON APPEAL

November 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Bhogal & Anor v Knight [2018] EWHC 2952 (Ch) the appellants failed in their appeal following an order that the respondent pay the costs of their initial application. The procedure described in the judgment is instructive.  It was yet another…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5:  IF YOU DON'T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5: IF YOU DON’T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

November 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the High Court decision in Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB). It is one of those cases that illustrate…

PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR'S COSTS CASE

PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR’S COSTS CASE

October 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment in  Gill v Heer Manak Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2881 (QB) is one of those cases that will get costs lawyers excited.  However it is not so much a case about costs as a case about evidence, or the absence…

COSTS REDUCED BY 25% : SEPARATE COSTS OF CLAIM AND COUNTERCLAIM: INCREASED COSTS WHEN LITIGATING AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON

COSTS REDUCED BY 25% : SEPARATE COSTS OF CLAIM AND COUNTERCLAIM: INCREASED COSTS WHEN LITIGATING AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON

October 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

In Bank St Petersburg PJSC & Anor v Arkhangelsky & Ors [2018] EWHC 2817 (Ch) Mr  Justice Hildyard considered the appropriate costs order after a lengthy trial. THE CASE There has been a lengthy trial (between February – July 2016) where…

"PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED": ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

“PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED”: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

October 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Kay, R (On the Application Of) v Scan-Thors (UK) Ltd & Anor (Costs) [2018] EWHC 2842 (Admin) the Divisional Court dealt robustly with arguments made by an interested party attempting to resist an order for costs. “Put bluntly, these submissions…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR'S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE - THREE TIMES

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR’S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE – THREE TIMES

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In  Lyons v Fox Williams LLP [2018] EWCA Civ 2347 the Court of Appeal turned down the claimant’s appeal.  The claimant had been unsuccessful in an action for professional negligence against a firm of solicitors. He was equally unsuccessful on appeal….

← Previous 1 … 21 22 23 … 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

  • COST BITES 383: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS FOLLOWING “MIXED” SUCCESS AT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION? WHAT IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE AMOUNT? (SOMETHING ABOUT APPROPRIATE DELEGATION AND HOURLY RATES TOO…)
  • WHEN A CASE – WEEKS AWAY FROM TRIAL WAS “UNTENABLE”: HOW DID WE GET HERE?
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 71: COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT PERMISSION TO AMEND EVEN THOUGH THE CURRENT CASE WAS “UNTENABLE”: LESSONS HERE FOR EVERYONE
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT TO WEAR TO COURT: “IF YOU ATTEND COURT DRESSED INAPPROPRIATELY, COURT STAFF MAY REFUSE YOU ENTRY”
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 70: THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE STRONG WORDS TO SAY ABOUT PLEADING POINTS IN A MAJOR TRIAL

Top Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT TO WEAR TO COURT: "IF YOU ATTEND COURT DRESSED INAPPROPRIATELY, COURT STAFF MAY REFUSE YOU ENTRY"
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 71: COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT PERMISSION TO AMEND EVEN THOUGH THE CURRENT CASE WAS "UNTENABLE": LESSONS HERE FOR EVERYONE
  • WHEN A CASE - WEEKS AWAY FROM TRIAL WAS "UNTENABLE": HOW DID WE GET HERE?
  • COST BITES 383: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS FOLLOWING "MIXED" SUCCESS AT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION? WHAT IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE AMOUNT? (SOMETHING ABOUT APPROPRIATE DELEGATION AND HOURLY RATES TOO...)
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 70: THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE STRONG WORDS TO SAY ABOUT PLEADING POINTS IN A MAJOR TRIAL

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.