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…
COST BITES 331: SOLICITOR FAILS TO SHOW THEY WERE OWED £573,529 IN COSTS: NEITHER A LIEN OR THE LEGAL AID CHARGE NECESSARILY GIVES RISE TO A DEBT FROM THE CLIENT
This is an unusual case where a third party challenged a solicitor’s right to be a creditor in an insolvency arrangement. The third party argued that the sums claimed by the solicitors were not in fact recoverable from the respondent. …
COST BITES: 330 THE ABSENCE OF A COSTS SCHEDULE DOES NOT MEAN THAT A SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT IS GOING TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS
Here we have an interesting issue about whether the successful respondent to an appeal should be deprived of their costs because a costs schedule had not been filed. The appellant’s alternative argument was that the respondent should be ordered to…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER…)
The first time I wrote on this topic many practitioners expressed surprise that I had written something so very “basic”. Some readers were incredulous. However, as we see below, others shared their experiences. This rule is not known, or not…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE? PLUS – THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS…
Earlier posts have shown that the claimant was successful on two of the key issues in relation to the appeal. However litigation can be cruel. A litigant can win on many issues but still lose the case. So it is…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 2: WAS AN OFFER ON LIABILITY EFFECTIVE IN THIS CONTEXT?
We continue with the detailed examination of the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 this morning. This aspect of the case is particularly important because, again, although the claimant lost the appeal he won on this particular issue. That…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER (1): WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “JUDGMENT” AND AN “ORDER” ?
There are some interesting issues raised in the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 today that every practitioner should be aware of. The case has been helpfully summarised by my colleague Elliot Kay here. I wanted to break down…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 THIS MORNING: AN OFFER OF 90% ON LIABILITY COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE PART 36 CONSEQUENCES WHEN A CLAIM IS APPROVED ON DAMAGES (BUT DID NOT IN THIS CASE).
I am grateful to my colleague Elliot Kay for sending me a note of a Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 given this morning. The issue relates to Part 36 offers on liability where the matter is compromised and…
COST BITES 329: THE COURT’S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR “OVERSPENDS” – COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET
Some of the basic principles upon which the courts make orders for interim payments are well established, particularly when the case has been budgeted. This case considers the appropriate approach when there is a claim for costs arising from interlocutory…
COST BITES 328: A CAREFULLY NUANCED DECISION ABOUT LIABILITY FOR COSTS, INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS, INCLUDING COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET
The question of “who won” is usually the starting point of assessing liability to pay costs. Complications arise when one party “won a bit” but not all it was seeking. We have a detailed consideration of these issues here. (Whether…
COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED “AGGRESSIVELY” – COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED
Here we have the defendant making a justified, and successful, application to strike out a Reply. However the judge was unhappy with the manner in which the application (and the litigation generally) was being conduced (by both sides). He found…
COST BITES 326: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL IN OBTAINING A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER: FARES FAIR IN THE BUS STATION CASE…
This judgment today is an interesting illustration of the fact that those providing support to a party can find themselves the subject of a non-party costs order. In this case the claimant company was in liquidation. The respondents to the…
COST BITES 325: DOES THE FACT THAT THERE WOULD BE COMPLEX ISSUES ON DETAILED ASSESSMENT MEANT THE COURT SHOULD NOT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF COSTS ON ACCOUNT?
The rules, and often the courts, are keen to encourage payments on account of costs. They have advantages to both parties. The receiving party receives a large percentage of costs promptly, the paying party reduces the amount of interest that…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SERVICE ON AN INDIVIDUAL USING S.1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006
This post reminds claimants that service can take place under s.1140 of the Companies Act on an individual in their capacity as an individual. It also serves as a reminder to defendants, and anyone who is a company director that…
COST BITES 324: THE TIME FOR ASSESSING COSTS IS NOW – WHO KNOWS WHAT WILL HAPPEN LATER
Here we are looking at an argument by a paying party that costs payable at an application should be reduced because the work would be required to be done at a later stage in any event. (The judge has no…
COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION
A party liable to pay the costs of a successful opponent is always keen to reduce that liability, not least by arguing that they should have a reduction in costs because of their opponent’s conduct. We see such an argument…
COST BITES 323: HOURLY RATES: THIS CASE DOES NOT FALL INTO LONDON BAND 1: IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT JUSTIFY FEES ABOVE THAT RATE…
We are returning to the issue of hourly rates. In this case the receiving party sought hourly rates that were above the London 1 band. The judge held that the case did not fall within that band and certainly did…
COST BITES 322: WHAT IS THE POSITION OF AN INSURER IN RELATION TO VAT WHEN THE INSURED IS INSOLVENT: DOES A PAYING PARTY NOW HAVE TO PAY VAT?
This is an interesting “cost bite” issue. What is the position on VAT when an insurer is being sued under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 but the insured has gone into voluntary liquidation? Is a paying party…
COST BITES 321: THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES ARE NOT “SOMEWHAT OUT OF DATE”
The previous post on the updating of the Guideline Hourly rates leads us to this next case. It poses the question – are the rates “somewhat out of date”. As we shall see the judge gives a clear answer. (There…
NEW YEAR: NEW GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THE DETAILS HERE: EFFECTIVE FROM YESTERDAY
The new Guideline hourly rates were published yesterday. They take effect from 1st January 2026 (for anyone working on that day…). They have been updated using service producer price inflation (SPPI). THE INCREASES The increases are 2.28%, using the…
NEW SERIES FOR 2026: CIVIL PROCEDURE “BACK TO BASICS MONDAY”: STARTING ON …. MONDAY…
We look at many cases on this blog where litigants (often more accurately – litigators) experience major procedural difficulties. It is surprising how often these difficulties arise from a very basic failure. That is a failure to follow a rule,…
WHEN A DAY LONG APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND INCURS COSTS OF OVER £1.3 MILLION (AND STILL THE BUNDLES AREN’T QUITE RIGHT…)
There are some interesting observations here about the strategy a party should adopt when facing an application to amend. Such an application is not a “mini trial”. It is clear from this case that substantial costs can be incurred in…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR 13: WHAT ARE PEOPLE READING?
It is always interesting to look back and see what are the most popular posts each year. Sometimes this contains surprises, sometimes it says something about the state (or at least the interests) of the legal profession. Here are…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR 11: OPENING LINES OF JUDGMENTS 2025: “FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS MEN LIVED JUST LIKE ANIMALS”: ST PAUL’S CATHEDRAL, SHERLOCK HOLMES AND FINDING INGENIOUS WAYS NOT TO PAY TAX: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE…
Consideration of the opening lines of judgments has been a feature of this blog for some years now. It has sometimes been a way of providing a little light relief towards the end of what is often a 12 month…
COST BITES 320: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO SEEK A FURTHER INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS: “I THINK IT CONSIDERABLY UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS POINT HAS BEEN TAKEN”
Later this month we are taking our traditional end of year look at “opening lines of judgments”. Sometimes opening lines provide a clue as to the judge’s thinking. When the first sentence contains the words “I think it is considerably…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR 5 : 111 POSTS IN THE “COSTS BITES” SERIES (AND COUNTING): DON’T LOOK AWAY NOW…
There is no doubt at all that the Costs Bites series is one of the most widely read on this blog. The series started in July 2022 and the aim is to look at what is happening in relation to…
USING WHATSAPP AND OTHER MEANS OF COMMUNICATION WITH CLIENTS: THE RISKS CONSIDERED
The previous post looked in detail at the issues in a solicitor and own client assessment caused by the solicitor’s use of WhatsApp. That judgment gives rise to much wider issues in relation to how solicitors communicate with clients. In…
COST BITES 319: WHATSAPP MESSAGES CAN FORM PART OF A SOLICITOR’S FILE: THE DEFENDANT FIRM WAS, THEREFORE, IN BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER
This case raises highly significant issues for all firms of solicitors. It relates specifically to whether messages sent by WhatsApp form from private phones form part of a solicitor’s file. However the case extends to any type of electronic communication,…
COST BITES 318: PART 36 ISSUES: DOES AN AGREEMENT ON DAMAGES AFTER TRIAL MEAN THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES DO NOT APPLY?
Do the normal Part 36 consequences apply when the parties agree damages and lodge a consent order after a trial on liability? That is the issue considered by the High Court here. (Part 36 consequences apply – the writing is…
COST BITES 317: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL AGENCY FEES/BREAKDOWN BATTLE: THE AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN
Here we have another case in the long-running battle over the disclosure of agency fees. I am grateful to Claire Kewin from Keoghs solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment and for her summary of its practical implications…
COST BITES 316: THE CLAIMANT HAS JUDGMENT FOR £175,380 BUT WHO (IF ANYONE) SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? A SURPRISING RESULT (JUST THINK “OUCH”..)
It is not uncommon to see discussions in relation to who should pay the costs after a judgment is given. This is a judgment with a twist, in that the court considered, at the end of protracted litigation, whether anyone…
COST BITES 315: A LACK OF AUTHORITATIVE CASE LAW DOES NOT JUSTIFY A DEPARTURE FROM THE GENERAL RULE THAT THE LOSING PARTY PAYS THE COSTS
Should the fact that there is no authoritative case law on a topic lead to a “different” order as to costs. This was one of the issues considered by the judge in this case. Similarly the court considered the relevance…
COST BITES 314: PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN THE RTA PROTOCOL: CLAIMANT LIMITED TO FIXED COSTS
This is the second case today that was sent in by a helpful reader. I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys who has sent me a copy of this judgment. It relates to the question of whether a personal…
MAZUR MATTERS 43: AN EXAMPLE WHERE SUPERVISION WAS FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE: ACTION BY THE SRA & A FINE OF £30,000
It would be interesting to know what (if any) percentage of the profession read the SRA document “Effective supervision – Guidance” published in November 2022. The Mazur issue was there in plain sight. There is only one practical example given in…
MAZUR MATTERS 42: CAN ANY GOOD COME OF ALL THIS? POSITIVE THINKING ABOUT DELEGATION AND THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: SOME USEFUL LINKS
The current situation is that large parts of the profession are waiting, with bated breath, for a Court of Appeal judgment as to whether the Mazur decision was right, in particular in relation to non-authorised employees having the “conduct” of litigation. …
You must be logged in to post a comment.