Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Court fees » Page 2

COURT FEES AND STEALTH TAXES: REPAYMENT OF TRIAL FEES TO END NEXT YEAR

December 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Court fees, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

Thanks to Kerry Underwood for pointing out the provisions of The Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2016 which comes into force on the 6th March 2017. There is a hidden “tax” in that the repayment of court fees has ended….

PAYING THE INCORRECT COURT FEE: ANOTHER IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT

December 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Court fees, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been several cases this year relating to  the consequences that flow when a claimant pays the incorrect court fee. Several issues remain unresolved In a judgment this morning His Honour Judge Godsmark QC considered the position where the wrong…

PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE: ACTION STAYED: SANITY IS BREAKING OUT

August 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several interesting issues arising out of the judgment of Master Clark in Lifestyles Equities C.V. -v- Sportsdirect.Com Retail Limited [2016] EWHC 2092.   In particular the fact that the decision in Richard Lewis & Others -v- Ward Hadaway [2015]…

INCREASED COURT FEES FROM THE 25th July 2016: AN OVERVIEW & USEFUL LINKS

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been requests, via twitter, that I publicise the increase in court fees that came into effect on the 25th July.  These are not universal increases (they do not increase issue fees in Part 7 claims for instance -…

PAYING THE "CORRECT" COURT FEE AND AMENDMENT: AN IMPORTANT CASE REVIEWING THE PRINCIPLES

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

This blog has looked several times* at the cases and principles that have followed the decision in Lewis -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch).   Applications around allegations of failure to pay the correct court fee have  become a new battleground…

COSTS BUDGETING – THE KEY DATES: A QUICK REMINDER TO AVOID A SHARP (BUT NOT NECESSARILY SHORT) SHOCK

July 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Uncategorized

You would think that everyone involved in litigation would know that new rules as to cost budgeting came into force on the 6th April 2016. However, judging from some of the blank (and worried) looks I have seen recently when…

NEW COURT FEES (INCREASED NEEDLESS TO SAY)

March 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

Court fees increased yesterday. There has been much public discussion of the family fees. Very little about the increase in fees for applications. LINKS TO THE RULES The statutory instrument is available here The facile “Impact Assessment” is available here….

PROBATE FEES,COSTS AND FATAL ACCIDENTS: SIX KEY POINTS

February 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Court fees, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Uncategorized

There has been major controversy recently about the proposed increase in probate fees. In particular there was some concern, expressed on twitter, that claimants could not afford to issue proceedings.  There are a number of points that need to be…

WHY THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COURT FEES INCREASE SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

If evidence were needed of the profound impact of the increase in court fees in can be found in newspaper articles over the past few days. IT IS JUST ONE CASE The Guardian reported on one case of a social…

COURT FEES: LINKS FOR TODAY

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

The links section is an integral part of this blog. For today, however, I wanted to take those links on the issue of court fees and put them in a post of their own.  That is the responses today to…

LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S REPORT 2015: CIVIL WORK

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The Lord Chief Justice’s Report 2015 covers a number of issues.  Of particular interest to civil practitioners. The Briggs Review is summarised. There is an emphasis on control of litigation costs and court fees “The Jackson review reforms have now…

← Previous 1 2

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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE “INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED”
  • COST BITES 381: DOES THE COURT HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT? SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT ALONG THE WAY…
  • SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
  • EXPERT WATCH 45: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WHO HAD KNOWLEDGE AND “GENUINE EXPERIENCE IN THE SUBJECT AREA”
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: KEEPING COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS OFF THE NAUGHTY STEP: WEBINAR PLUS USEFUL CHECKLISTS AND PRECEDENTS: 30th APRIL 2026

Top Posts

  • COST BITES 380: "ALWAYS CHOOSE A COSTS LAWYER FOR EXPERT LEGAL COSTS ADVICE": GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA
  • SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
  • EXPERT WATCH 45: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WHO HAD KNOWLEDGE AND "GENUINE EXPERIENCE IN THE SUBJECT AREA"
  • THE COSTS LIABILITY OF A REPRESENTATIVE OF A DECEASED PERSON UNDER CPR 19.12 CONSIDERED: THE SITUATION IS NOT THE SAME AS AN ADMINISTRATOR OR EXECUTOR
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE "INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED"

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