COST BITES 288: IS IT REALLY GOING TO COST £39,967.50 TO HOLD A MEETING BETWEEN LAWYERS? (AND THERE WILL BE TEN OF THEM…)
Here we are looking at a substantial reduction in a budget. The claimants here sought £39,967.50 for each meeting of the solicitors co-ordinating group litigation. The court was not happy with this… (When you are claiming £39,967.5o a meeting for…
COST BITES 287: YOU’VE AGREED FOUR LEADING COUNSEL FOR THE FIRST DAY OF THE TRIAL – ONLY TWO OF THEM ARE GETTING PAID AFTER THAT
When the parties agree a phase of a budget this can, on the face of it, have a knock on effect on the related phases. But, as Cab Calloway famously said – that ain’t necessarily so. In the case we…
COST (MEGA) BITES 286: AND YOU SAID THAT WITH AN “ADMIRABLY STRAIGHT FACE”: “OVERLAWYERING” CONSIDERED IN AN EXHAUSTING CASE
We are looking at a case that has already been subject to several posts on this site. In the previous decision about budgeting the claimants’ budgets were described as “absurdly high” and the arguments “strains all credulity”. The court is…
COST BITES 285: DOES THE COURT NEED TO VARY THE RECEIVING PARTY’S BUDGET WHEN IT HAS ORDERED THAT COSTS BE PAID ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS?
We are looking again at the award of indemnity costs. The judge ordered that costs be paid to the claimant on the indemnity basis. He then went on to consider whether, given that decision, it was necessary to retrospectively vary…
THE ROLE OF LEADING COUNSEL IN RELATION TO EXPERT REPORTS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: A CLIENT CAN PAY FOR WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THESE COSTS WILL NOT BE RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES
How far should leading counsel, or counsel generally, be involved in the preparation of expert reports and witness statements? One obvious reply is “not at all”, given that the evidence should come from the expert or witness. These issues were…
COST BITES 236 : COSTS BUDGETING CAN BE RETROSPECTIVE : BUDGET CONSIDERED FROM THE DATE OF THE CCMC NOT 11 MONTHS LATER
Can the court ever set a costs budget retrospectively? In this case the judge held that it could, further there were good reasons for doing so in this case. “I do not accept that the Court is unable to…
COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A “SHORT CUT” TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY’S DAMAGES
A solicitor who wishes to deduct “solicitor and own client” costs in a case involving a minor or protected party requires approval by the Court. Here we have a case where the claimant’s solicitors argued, robustly, that the current process…
“THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK”: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN
In Stephen Herbert Hunt v Oceania Capital Reserves Limited & Ors [2025] EWHC 837 (Ch) Master Brightwell refused the second and third defendants application for relief from sanctions in a case where the costs budget was served late. However it…
VARDY -v- ROONEY: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT HAD BEEN GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT IN COSTS ASSESSMENT FAILS TO CROSS THE LINE
In Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 851 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh rejected the claimant’s arguments that the defendant’s solicitors had misconducted themselves improperly and that there should consequently be a disallowance of some of the costs claimed by the…
COST BITES 225: A PEEK INSIDE THE BUDGETING PROCESS: “PROPORTIONALITY TRUMPS REASONABLENESS”
We get a rare chance to look inside the costs budgeting process in the judgment of Master Brightwell in Atlantic Ways Holding SA v Freetown Terminal Holding Ltd [2025] EWHC 674 (Ch). The rationale behind each budgeting decision is set…
COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS “ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE”
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC), looked in the previous post. Because of the nature of the budget that the…
COST BITES 216: THIS IS A CASE OF HIGH VALUE: HOWEVER THE CLAIMANTS’ COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AND THE HOURLY RATES ARE EXCESSIVE
This is the first of two posts looking at the costs budgeting judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC). The judge made observations in…
COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
In Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] EWHC 260 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith considered the arguments as to whether a major reduction in a party’s costs budget should lead to an order for costs being made, rather than an order for costs…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: MAXIMISING COSTS RECOVERY ON AN INTER PARTIES RECOVER – THE LITIGATOR’S ROLE: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025
Detailed assessment usually takes place after attempts at settlement of costs have failed and there are some major differences between the parties. The webinar uses examples from reported cases to show where failures and omissions by the receiving party has…
THREE WEBINARS ON COSTS TO START OF THE CALENDAR (IF NOT THE FINANCIAL) YEAR
There are three webinars on costs this January of interest to most litigators. The first deals with the summary assessment of costs; the second the role of the litigator in detailed assessments and the third on the topic of deducting…
DELEGATION IN LITIGATION: A CASE TO POINT – AND A WEBINAR ON THE 9th DECEMBER 2024
It is often the function, if not the duty, of someone who writes about civil procedure to look at a decision and then extract the most uninteresting aspect of the case for wider publication. I am doing this in relation…
COST BITES 195: THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING TO COSTS BUDGETS: “GOOD REASONS” FOR DEPARTING AND PART 36 ISSUES
In A & V Building Solution Ltd v J & B Hopkins Ltd [2024] EWHC 2914 (TCC) Mr Roger Ter Haar KC considered the circumstances in which a successful party can go outside the scope of budgeted costs. “……
COST BITES 194: CLAIMANT WHO SUCCEEDED ON SOME, BUT NOT ALL, ISSUES AWARDED COSTS ON THE STANDARD BASIS
In FXS v The Mulberry Bush Organisation Ltd [2024] EWHC 2844 (KB) Margaret Obi, sitting as a High Court Judge, considered issues of costs where a claimant had not succeeded in establishing negligence at trial but was successful on other…
SENIOR MASTER COOK’S GUIDANCE ON COST MANAGEMENT HEARINGS: A PIECE BY PIECE GUIDE (2):DELEGATION
We are continuing with our detailed examination of the Kings Bench Masters Cost Management Hearings Guidance Note. This time we are looking at issues relating to delegation. Costs budgeting and Cost Judges encourage delegation. The problem for many practitioners is that…
SENIOR MASTER COOK’S GUIDANCE ON COST MANAGEMENT HEARINGS: A PIECE BY PIECE GUIDE (1): THE GENERAL APPROACH AND HOURLY RATES
Senior Master Cook published the Kings Bench Masters Cost Management Hearings Guidance Note on the 26th September. I am going through this on a topic by topic guide. Here we look at the general approach to budgeting and hourly rates. …
CLAIMANT FAILS IN APPLICATION TO HAVE APPEAL JUDGMENT SET ASIDE: THE SOLICITOR SHOULD HAVE NOTICED THE APPEAL HAD BEEN LISTED: LATE SERVICE MEANS COSTS BUDGET WAS ASSESSED AT NIL
The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Deng v Zhang & Anor [2024] EWHC 2392 (KB) shows a case with a whole history of errors and mishaps. The claimant failed to file a cost budget in time but obtained relief…
COST BITES 182: ANOTHER CASE OF A CLAIMANT PAYING THE COSTS OF A BUDGETING HEARING BECAUSE OF AN UNREALISTIC APPROACH
In Jenkins v Thurrock Council [2024] EWHC 2248 (KB) Master Thornett revisited the principles considered in Worcester v Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB) It was held that the claimant’s unrealistic figures in a costs budget should lead to the claimant paying…
COST BITES 180: EXCESSIVE BUDGET LEADS TO PARTY BEING ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF A BUDGETING HEARING
In Nicholas Worcester v Dr Philip Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB) Master Thornett awarded costs against a party who, the Master felt, had over-inflated their costs budget. The case stands as a warning that a party putting forward a budget which is…
COST BUDGETS, VARIATIONS AND “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS”: JUDGE REFUSES TO REVISE THE BUDGET AFTER TRIAL
In Rahman v Hassan & Ors (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 2038 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused the claimant’s application that the budget be revised after the trial. The judge held that the matters relied…
COST BITES 173: VARYING A COSTS BUDGET “AFTER THE EVENT”: IF THE APPLICATION WAS NOT “PROMPT” THE BUDGET WILL NOT BE VARIED
We are looking again at the decision in Khokan v Nirjhor (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 1873 (KB), this time on the issue of costs budgeting. The judge considered the defendant’s budget in unusual circumstances. The claimant’s case had been struck…
“UNNECESSARILY ARGUMENTATIVE OR WASTEFUL CORRESPONDENCE” NOT COUNTENANCED IN COSTS BUDGETING: “IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO”
The post earlier this morning on “intemperate” comments in court documents and correspondence reminded me that I meant to highlight a particular aspect of the judgment in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). The judgment highlights that unnecessarily argumentative…
COST (MEGA) BITES 168: AN EXHAUSTING READ (V): BUDGETS THAT ARE DESCRIBED AS “ABSURDLY HIGH”, “WHOLLY EXCESSIVE” AND WHICH “STRAINS ALL CREDULITY”
Unsurprisingly we are returning to the judgment in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). The judges gave some examples of parts of the claimants’ budgets in particular that had been “overbudgeted”. They were not shy IN setting out their…
COST (MEGA) BITES 167: AN EXHAUSTING CASE (IV): “BUT YOURS IS NEARLY AS BIG AS MINE” IS NOT A GOOD ARGUMENT: COSTS BUDGETS COULD NOT BE COMPARED
We are continuing to look at the judgment in relation to the budgets in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). In this post we are considering the argument that since claimants’ budget was very similar to the defendants’…
COST (MEGA) BITES 166: AN EXAUSTING CASE (iii): “THE CLAIMANTS’ APPROACH TO BUDGETING IS REDOLENT OF FINANCIAL INCONTINENCE”
The general observations made about the budgets in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB) is of importance. The court was particularly scathing of the claimants’ budget. It also rejected the claimants’ contention that the defendants’ budget had been artificially…
COST (MEGA) BITES 165: AN EXHAUSTING CASE (ii): PROPORTIONALITY WHERE THE CLAIMANTS CLAIM THE CASE IS WORTH £6 BILLION: THE PARTIES ARE NOT HANDED A BLANK CHEQUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECOVERABLE COSTS
We are continuing with the examination of the judgment of Mr Justice Constable and Senior Costs Judge Saker in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). This time by looking at the court’s consideration of issues of proportionality when…
COST (MEGA) BITES 164: AN EXHAUSTING CASE:COSTS BUDGETING WHEN THE BUDGETS TOTAL £650 MILLION (1): GENERAL PRINCIPLES
The judgment of Mr Justice Constable sitting with Senior Costs Judge Saker in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB) contains much that is of interest to litigators. The judges budgeted a case where the claimants sought over £342…
COST BITES 159: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE GOLDEN RULE – THAT THE CLIENT SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED
We are looking again at the judgment in St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB). The judge considered the question of whether the client had been informed that the budget had been exceeded and that the solicitors…
COST BITES 156: COSTS BUDGETING WAS APPROPRIATE IN THE CASE OF A SERIOUSLY INJURED CHILD: IT HELPS THE CLAIMANT AS MUCH AS THE DEFENDANT
I am grateful to PJ Kirby KC for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Brown in the case of PXT -v- Atere-Roberts [2024] EWHC 1372 (KB), a copy of which is available here Judgment PXT final 6…
COSTS BUDGETING: ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FROM COSTS JUDGE BROWN
Costs Judge Simon Brown has produced a Note to assist in the case management and costs budgeting process in Kings Bench Division involving high value personal injury claim. The purpose of the Note is to “provide a neutral approach to…
COST BITES 146: LITIGANT IN PERSON (USING DIRECT ACCESS COUNSEL) WAS TO FILE A COSTS BUDGET
In Cotham School v Bristol City Council & Ors (Ruling on Costs Budgeting) [2024] EWHC 824 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) stated that a litigant in person was to provide a costs budget. The litigant…
COST BITES 132: INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS AND COSTS OF A CONSEQUENTIAL HEARING
In Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Limited & Ors [2023] EWHC 2923 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor considered issues relating to an interim payment on costs and whether a consequentials hearing should be assessed…
WEBINAR ON CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE COSTS: KING CHAMBERS EVENT: 7th DECEMBER 2023
My colleagues Andrew Hogan and Kevin Latham are presenting a webinar on Clinical Negligence Costs on the 7th December 2023. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR In this timely seminar, Andrew Hogan and Kevin Latham will consider current issues in clinical negligence costs…
COST BITES 123: COSTS OF BUDGETING REDUCED BY 25% TO REFLECT CLAIMANT’S UNREALISTIC BUDGET
In Reid v Wye Valley NHS Trust & Anor [2023] EWHC 2843 (KB) Master Brown reduced the recoverable costs of budgeting by 25% to reflect the unrealistic nature of the claimant’s budget. There are important issues here for those who…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: BUDGETING AT TRIAL IS A FAIRLY HOPELESS TASK
There is much to learn from the decision of Mr Justice Ritchie in Tan v Idlbi & Anor [2023] EWHC 2840 (KB). The claimant was unsuccessful in an application for relief from sanctions following late service of the costs budget….
COST BITES 122: THE APPROPRIATE ORDER FOR COSTS WHEN BOTH SIDES “WIN” AND BOTH SIDES “LOSE”: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE COSTS BUDGET
We are returning to an examination of costs orders made and their practical implications for the client. In Aymes International Ltd v Nutrition4u BV & Ors [2023] EWHC 2672 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered…
COST BITES 119: COSTS BUDGETING: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO VARY ITS BUDGET TO INCLUDE COSTS ALREADY INCURRED OBTAINING SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE
There is a report of an interesting decision of Master McCloud in Yelland -v- Space Engineering Services Ltd [2023] EWHC 2823 (KB). The report is from Sean Linley of Carter Burnett and can be read here. There is a link to…
COST BITES 116: YOU CAN’T AVOID PAYING THE COSTS OF AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL JUST BECAUSE THEY WEREN’T IN THE COSTS BUDGET…
We have seen some “interesting” submissions in relation to costs on this blog. However one of the most novel is the point taken by the Third Party in South Tees Development Corporation & Anor v PD Teesport Ltd & Anor…
COST BITES 96: A “REPLACEMENT” BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED
In Henderson and Jones Ltd v Stargunter Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 1849 (TCC) Neil Moody KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered whether a formal application for relief from sanctions was needed in a case where a party…
COST BITES 94: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: COSTS BUDGETING: BUDGETING OVERSPEND: THE DUTY TO WARN: THE APPROPRIATE SUCCESS FEE
In JXC v NIS [2023] EWHC 1000 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard considered issues relating to the recoverability of costs from the client over and above those recovered inter-partes. This case shows the importance of informing the client about the costs…
COST BITES 92: THE TRANSIT OF VENUS, THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON AND THE QUESTION OF WHETHER TIME SPENT AT CASE MANAGEMENT MEETINGS IS RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES
I am grateful to Andrew Davis KC for bringing my attention to the judgment of Master McCloud in Hadley v Przybylo (Costs, Costs budgeting, Costs lawyers, personal injury, case manager, recoverability) [2023] EWHC 1392 (KB). The Master rejected the argument…
CLAIMANTS’ APPLICATION TO VARY COSTS BUDGET DISMISSED: A SELF – IMPOSED DIFFICULTY DID NOT (ON THESE FACTS) AMOUNT TO A SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT
In Simpsons (Preston) Ltd & Anor v MS Amlin Underwriting Ltd [2023] EWHC 1370 (Comm) HHJ Pearce refused the claimants’ application to vary the costs budget in relation to disclosure. The reason the application was made because the claimants had…
COST BITES 87: ISSUES RELATING TO EXCEEDING THE BUDGET LEFT TO THE COSTS JUDGE
In BES Commercial Electricity Ltd & Ors v Cheshire West And Chester Council [2022] EWHC 3333 (KB) Mr Justice Freedman declined an invitation to give any indication in relation to the defendant’s application to depart from its budget. The matter…
COST BITES 83: DEFENDANT SERVING BUDGET LATE SCRAPES HOME IN A “BORDERLINE” CASE
In K/S Mountain Invest v Ducat Maritime Ltd [2023] EWHC 939 (Comm) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted the defendant relief from sanctions following the late filing of its costs budget. The defendant was, perhaps, fortunate….
COST BITES 82: WHEN THE SIZE OF THE COSTS STARTS TO SWAMP THE SIZE OF THE ESTATE: AN EXHORTATION TO PARTIES INVOLVED IN INHERITANCE CLAIMS
The judgment of Master Brightwell in Amnir & Ors v Bala & Ors [2023] EWHC 1054 (Ch) contains a warning to many, if not all, litigants, particularly those involved in Inheritance Act claims. The size of the costs in the…
COST BITES 75: LIABILITY TO COSTS: RETROSPECTIVE ATTEMPT TO VARY COSTS BUDGET: WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFER AFFECTS LIABILITY TO COSTS MADE PRIOR TO THAT OFFER
We looked at the judgment of HHJ Hodge QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Wigan Borough Council v Scullindale Global Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 779 (Ch) in an earlier post on Proving Things. There is a subsequent…
You must be logged in to post a comment.