A FASCINATING AND IMPORTANT JUDGMENT: WHEN CAN A NOTICE BE SERVED BY EMAIL? AT WHAT TIME CAN IT BE SERVED? ALSO – SOMETHING ABOUT NOTICES OF DISCONTINUANCE AND QOCS
I have been sent a case that is important and interesting on many levels. Firstly in relation to when it is permissible to serve documents by email; secondly in relation to the latest time in the working day that documents…
COST BITES 263: QOCS AND CLAIMS AGAINST THE POLICE – A SIMILAR ISSUE TO YESTERDAY BUT WITH A TOTALLY DIFFERENT RESULT (NO ONE EVER SAID LITIGATION WAS EASY…)
Yesterday we looked at a case where, on appeal, the judge indicated that he would set aside a costs order made against the claimants who had brought an action against the police. The claimants had QOCS protection. Today we look…
COST BITES 262: THE CLAIMANTS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ORDERED TO PAY COSTS IN A “MIXED” CLAIM AGAINST THE POLICE
Here we are looking at issues relating to costs in an action that included a claim for personal injury but also included other elements. The question the appellate judge had to decide was whether the trial judge had applied the…
WHEN QOCS DOES NOT APPLY TO THE WHOLE OF A CLAIM: WHAT PERECENTAGE SHOULD THE CLAIMANTS PAY: THE MATTER CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
For the second time today we are looking at the rules relating to Qualified one way costs shifting (QOCS) and its exceptions. Here the defendant had spent £2 million successfully defending a claim, only part of that action was a…
WILL A COSTS ORDER NORMALLY BE MADE AGAINST A CREDIT HIRE COMPANY? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING
This is the first of several points that will look in detail at the Court of Appeal decision today in relation to the liability of credit hire companies to pay costs. This first post outlines the main findings. Later posts…
COST BITES 220: QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO CO-CLAIMANTS WHO DO NOT BRING A CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY: NOR DOES IT APPLY WHEN A CASE IS STRUCK OUT
In BB & Ors v Khayyat & Ors [2025] EWHC 443 (KB) Mr Justice Soole rejected an argument that claimants who had not brought an action for personal injury could have the benefit of QOCS protection. The fact that they…
FAILING TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM IS NOT AN “ABUSE OF PROCESS” SO AS TO LEAD TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
We are returning to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Court of Appeal in Birley & Anor v Heritage Independent Living Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 44. The Court upheld a finding that the failure to serve the claim form, or…
APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS DISMISSED: NO DUTY TO “DUMP” A CLIENT WHEN FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED
In Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports & Anor (Re Wasted Costs Order) [2024] EWHC 2415 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed an application for wasted costs against the claimant’s solicitors. This dismissal took place at “stage one” – with the allegations…
COST BITES 151: DOES QOCS APPLY TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT? YES IT DOES – BUT THE DEFENDANT HAS PERMISSION TO APPEAL
In Challis v Bradpiece [2024] EWHC 1124 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered of whether a claimant had QOCS protection in detailed assessment. He concluded that the claimant continued to have costs protection. He accepted that the point was…
QOCS: CLAIMS FOR £1 IN DAMAGES AND NOMINAL DAMAGES STILL HAVE QOCS PROTECTION
In Clark & Ors v Adams & Anor [2024] EWHC 62 (KB) Mr Justice Soole determined that claims for £1 in damages and for “vindicatory purposes only” still have the protection of QOCS. The size of the claim and the…
COST BITES 120: QOCS AND HIRE CHARGES: DECISION THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS OUTSIDE QOCS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL
In Amjad v UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 2832 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie overturned a decision that the QOCS cap should be lifted in relation to a claimant who had failed to beat the defendant’s Part 36 offer and who…
COST BITES 107: A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER SHOULD NOT BE MADE AGAINST A SOLICITOR REPRESENTING A CLAIM ON A CFA BASIS: SEEKING A FINANCIAL BENEFIT DID NOT MEAN THEY WERE ACTING OUTSIDE THEIR ROLE AS SOLICITOR
I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Freedman in The Scout Association -v- Bolt Burdon Kemp [2023] EWHC 2575 (KB). On appeal Freedman J upheld the…
COST BITES 104: “THE LATEST BATTLE IN A WIDER FORENSIC LEGAL WAR”: DEFENDANT NOT ENTITLED TO NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST A COMPANY IT ASSERTED WAS “THE REAL PARTY” IN THE DISPUTE
In the judgment given today in Soares v Wilson [2023] EW Misc 11 (CC) HHJ Luba KC rejected an application that costs be paid by a non-party. The defendant’s application that a PLC pay the costs of the action because…
DEFENDANT NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO ENFORCE COSTS IN A CASE WHERE THERE WAS A “MIXED CLAIM”
I am grateful to Kevin Donoghue from Donoghue solicitors for bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 1974 (KB). It is a…
PART 36, LATE ACCEPTANCE AND QOCS: COURT OF APPEAL DECIDE AN UNUSUAL ISSUE: A COURT CANNOT MAKE AN ORDER PROTECTING A PARTY AGAINST A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE RULES
In Tabbitt v Clark [2023] EWCA Civ 744 the Court of Appeal rejected an application for a declaration that would have “future proofed” the claimant’s position in relation to liability for costs following late acceptance of the defendant’s Part 36…
COST BITES 90: CLAIMANTS LIABLE TO PAY 5% OF DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HUMAN RIGHTS, PERSONAL INJURIES AND “MIXED CLAIMS”
In ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors, Re Costs [2023] EWHC 1337 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill considered the liability of the claimants to pay costs in a “mixed claim” which was, primarily, a personal injury claim. She…
THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO STRIKE OUT A PROPERLY PLEADED CLAIM IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: JUDGE’S SHOULD BE ASTUTE TO DEAL WITH APPLICATIONS TO STRIKE OUT WHICH ARE, IN REALITY, APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The judgment of Mr Justice Choudhury in Kasongo v CRBE Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 557 demonstrates the danger when a defendant makes an application to strike out a statement of case. The judge allowed an appeal where a…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS FROM APRIL 6th: OMNIBUS EDITION
The new rules on QOCS come into force on the 6th April. Here is a review of the key points as to issue, the consequences and links to useful commentary. WHEN THE RULES COME INTO FORCE The key date…
APRIL 5th IS AN IMPORTANT DATE: WHAT IS MEANT BY “ISSUED” IN THE CONTEXT OF CHANGES TO QOCS?
The new rules relating to the ability to set off defendant’s costs liabilities against a claimant’s costs and damages have, I am told, led to a rush to issue proceedings and a backlog in some courts. These rules come into…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS 3: WHAT INFORMED COMMENTATORS ARE SAYING: & TWO USEFUL WEBINARS
In the third in this series I thought it would be useful to highlight what informed commentators are saying in relation the new rules. I have gathered a range of views below. I have taken some key comments, however reading…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS 2: WHAT THEY DO AND WHEN THEY DO IT FROM…
This is the second in the series that examines the new rules as to QOCS coming into force on the 6th April 2023. Here we look at the impact of the new rules and the date of implementation. …
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS AND COSTS 1: IMPLEMENTATION
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2023 make major changes to the rules relating to the set off of costs and QOCS, reversing the decision of the Supreme Court in Ho -v- Adelkun. Here I want to look at the rule…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND WHEN AN INVOICE WAS DOCTORED: NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE SAID WITH FLOWERS
I am grateful to barrister William Rankin for sending me a copy of the judgment of Recorder Knifton KC in Hamblett -v- Liverpool Wholesale Flowers Limited (Liverpool County Court, 23rd January 2023) a copy of which can be found here …
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM
In Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s appeal, which was an attempt to subvert the principles of Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”). The claimant discontinued the action…
ANOTHER QOCS AND PART 36 CASE: COURT MAKING ORDER UNDER PART 36 DID NOT LEAD TO QOCS PROTECTION BEING OUSTED
In University Hospitals of Derby & Burton NHS Foundation Trust -v- Harrison [2022] EWCA Civ 1660 * the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s argument that QOCS protection was lost when the court was called upon to make an order…
QOCS PROTECTION APPLIED TO THE PERIOD BEFORE THE CLAIM WAS AMENDED TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Pathan v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2022] EWHC 3244 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne held that an action could not become subject to QOCS part way through. If the claim was a personal injury claim at trial then…
CLAIMANT’S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER DID NOT PERMIT DEFENDANT TO SET OFFCOSTS AGAINST DAMAGES: QOCS PRINCIPLES REIGN SUPREME
In Chappell v Mrozek [2022] EWHC 3147 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the defendant’s argument that the defendant’s entitlement to costs, arising from late acceptance of a Part 36 offer, could be enforced from the claimant’s damages. The judgment examines the…
COST BITES 34: INTERLOCUTORY COSTS ORDERS CAN BE MADE AGAINST PARTIES WITH THE PROTECTION OF QOCS (IT IS ENFORCEMENT THAT MAY BE AN ISSUE)
In Atmani & Ors v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea & Ors [2022] EWHC 2618 (KB) Senior Master Fontaine considered the costs consequences of the decisions made in her judgment, considered in an earlier post. The Master held that…
QOCS APPLIES TO LEGALLY AIDED CASES: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Macaulay v Karim & Anor [2022] EWHC 1270 (SCCO) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker found that a legally aided claimant had the protection of QOCS. A defendant who had a costs order in its favour could not enforce that order…
A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO QOCS PROTECTION: THAT WAS NOT WHAT THE JACKSON REFORM WERE FOR…
I am grateful to barrister Stephen Elphick for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gargan in Sutcliffe -v- Ali (County Court at Middlesbrough 15th January 2021). It is a case that deals with the issue of whether…
KERRY UNDERWOOD ON COSTS – AND SO MUCH MORE: SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE READ ALL ABOUT IT
Kerry Underwood has started a new Newsletter – “Kerry On Costs… And So Much More…” THIRTY ISSUES IN 2021 The first issue can be seen here (and the link on this blog) and Kerry will produce at least 30…
QOCS IN “MIXED “CASES: THE COURT OF APPEAL SPEAKS
In the judgment today in Brown v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1724 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of QOCS in “mixed cases”. The judgment requires careful reading. Generally speaking all personal…
THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE
The “Back to Basics” series, as the title suggests, deals with some of the basic elements of civil procedure. It covers everything from applications and bundles to the taking of witness statements. The titles are often prompted by elements…
DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE
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…
QOCS PROTECTION COVERS A COUNTER-CLAIMING DEFENDANT: SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT
I am grateful to barrister Andrew Lyons for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Freedman in Ketchion -v- McEwan (28th June 2018), a copy of which is available here, 1061737_Ketchion v McEwan_Judgment for Approval_26 6 18. It is…
FULL QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO “MIXED CLAIMS”: THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
In The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Brown [2018] EWHC 2046 (Admin) Mrs Justice Whipple held that a claim against the police for misuse of data, misfeasance in public office and misuse of private information, did not give rise…
APPEALS, QOCS AND SET OFF: MORE ON THE DECISION IN CARTWRIGHT -V- VENDUCT: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED SET OFF OF APPEAL COSTS
I am grateful to Gary Brankin and Jeremy Rae of BC Legal for providing more information about the decision in Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654, the court of Appeal decision on QOCS considered yesterday. This is a point on…
TOMLIN ORDER PREVENTS “SUCCESSFUL” DEFENDANT RECOVERING COSTS FROM CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES IN A QOCS CASE: BUT CHOOSE YOUR DEFENDANTS CAREFULLY
In Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to the recoverability of costs in multi-defendant cases where the claimant would normally have the protection of qualified one-way costs shifting. The case provides…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ALLEGATION SHOULD HAVE GONE TO A HEARING: HIGH COURT DECISION: NO REQUIREMENT FOR EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
In Alpha Insurance A/S v Roche & Anor [2018] EWHC 1342 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip found that the circuit judge should have allowed a claim of fundamental dishonesty to be heard. She allowed an appeal and held that the court should…
QOCS: WHAT IS A CLAIM FOR “DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES”? JUDGMENT HERE – APPEAL PENDING
NB THIS JUDGMENT WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL. SEE THE POST HERE. I am grateful to barrister Claire Darwin for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Luba in Brown -v- The Commissioner of Police for the…
WHEN QOCS APPLY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: THE SWINGS AND THE ROUNDABOUTS
In Corstorphine (An Infant) v Liverpool City Council [2018] EWCA Civ 270 the Court of Appeal considered an important issue in relation to Qualified One Costs Shifting. What order should be made when the claimant has QOCS protection against some of…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY A DOZEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: A RECAP
Given recent decisions on fundamental dishonesty this may be a good time to rake over some key points. “I assure the Committee that the way that the clause is drafted should not result in the courts using the measures lightly….
ALLEGING AND FINDING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY, PLEADING AND EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY
I am grateful to barrister Tom Vonberg for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal decision today in Howlett -v- Ageas [2017] EWCA Civ 1696. Howlett & anr v Davies & anr- jt Final-1. Tom acted for the…
MIB CLAIM IS SUBJECT TO QOCS: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURN HOWE
“For the purposes of CPR Part 44.13, which describes the claims eligible for Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”), what is a claim for damages for personal injury? As Stewart J said it is a simple question but does not yield…
QOCS, SET OFF AND COSTS: THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE POWER TO SET OFF COSTS AGAINST COSTS: COUNTY COURT DECISION
In Darini -v- Markerstudy Group (24th April 2017) His Honour Judge Dight considered an important issue in relation to set off and costs. A copy of the judgment is available here. HMC25855_DariniOlsoyvMarkerstudy_ApprovedJudgment_24042017 (2) and has kindly been provided by Gavin Lampert…
SETTING ASIDE DISCONTINUANCE AND DISAPPLYING QOCS: A HIGH COURT DECISION
In Shaw -v- Medtronic [2017] EWHC 1397 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender considered issues relating to the setting aside of notices of discontinuance and disapplying QOCS. He declined to set aside a notice of discontinuance or give permission to enforce costs…
FIXED COSTS APPLY TO APPLICATIONS FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Sharp -v- Leeds City Council [2017] EWCA Civ 33 deals with an important point about fixed costs and applications for pre-action disclosure. KEY POINTS An application for pre-action disclosure made by a claimant…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FINDING SET ASIDE ON APPEAL
The judgment of His Honour Judge Hodge QC in Meadows -v- La Tasca Restaurants Limited [2016]EW Misc B28 (CC) (16 June 2016) is now available on Bailli. It contains some important observations about findings of fundamental dishonesty. “In my judgment,…
QOCS & DISCONTINUANCE: ANOTHER CASE (WHERE THE CLAIMANT WAS SUCCESSFUL)
I am grateful to barrister James Bentley for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Recorder Berkley in Magon -v- Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance PLC (26th February 2016). Another decision in relation to QOCS and discontinuance. The District Judge…
CLAIMANT ESTOPPED FROM RELYING ON QOCS: THE NEED TO BE ACCURATE
I am grateful to barrister Matthew White for sending me details and a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Lopez in Price -v- Egbert H Taylor & Company Limited (16th June 2016). This is the second judgment in the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.