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 budgeting » Page 4
HARRISON -v- COVENTRY: THE COMMENTARY SO FAR: USEFUL LINKS

HARRISON -v- COVENTRY: THE COMMENTARY SO FAR: USEFUL LINKS

June 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

The Court of Appeal decision  Harrison -v- University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire Hospital NHS Trust [2017]  EWCA Civ 792  is a significant one.   To help consider its practical significance here are links to the commentary on the case. (I…

COSTS BUDGETING AND THE FINAL BILL: HARRISON IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

June 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

How definitive is a costs budget when it comes to detailed assessment? That is an issue that has been troubling the courts now for a few years.  The judgment of the Court of Appeal  today in Harrison -v- University Hospitals…

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE I: TO AVOID "AGREEMENT" OF COSTS BUDGETS BY DEFAULT READ DIRECTIONS FOR THE CCMC WITH CONSIDERABLE CARE

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE I: TO AVOID “AGREEMENT” OF COSTS BUDGETS BY DEFAULT READ DIRECTIONS FOR THE CCMC WITH CONSIDERABLE CARE

May 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am doing a series of posts on matters arising from the APIL annual conference.  I am not aiming to cover all the issues and matters raised.  People can (and should) read the Presidents speech .   Given the nature of…

COSTS, BUDGETS AND "STRATEGY": THE CASES TO READ

COSTS, BUDGETS AND “STRATEGY”: THE CASES TO READ

May 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Is it appropriate to talk about “strategy” in relation to costs budgeting? It probably says a lot that I am at the APIL annual conference and this is one of the things being talked about in the reception at the…

MERRIX NOT BEING APPEALED (BUT HARRISON IS - WATCH THIS SPACE)

MERRIX NOT BEING APPEALED (BUT HARRISON IS – WATCH THIS SPACE)

April 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The decision in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 346 (QB) is not being appealed by the defendant. The rationale is, apparently, that the defendant did not want to risk losing the listing of the appeal in Harrison…

FILING FORM H: WHEN DOES A CASE HAVE A VALUE OF "LESS THAN £50,000"?  A POINT TO WATCH

FILING FORM H: WHEN DOES A CASE HAVE A VALUE OF “LESS THAN £50,000”? A POINT TO WATCH

April 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There are now several formats for Form H. The “short” one page version is now used in cases where the value is between £25,000 and  “less than £50,000”. Some judges are interpreting this strictly to read between £25,000 and £49,999″….

"AGREED" COSTS BUDGETS NOT APPROVED BY THE COURT : THAT QC IS JUST TOO EXPENSIVE - THINK AGAIN

“AGREED” COSTS BUDGETS NOT APPROVED BY THE COURT : THAT QC IS JUST TOO EXPENSIVE – THINK AGAIN

March 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Brown -v- BCA Trading Limited [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) Mr Registrar Jones refused to approve “agreed” budgets. He held that the fees of leading counsel were too high and needed to be reconsidered. This shows that an agreement between…

COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED

COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED

March 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The previous post looked at the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car Giant Limited -v- the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hammersmith [2017] EWHC 197 (TCC). Here we look at the subsequent judgment on costs at [2017]…

MERRIX ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT JUDGE: COSTS BUDGETING IS AS DEFINITIVE FOR PAYING PARTY AS IT IS FOR RECEIVING PARTY: JUDGMENT TODAY

MERRIX ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT JUDGE: COSTS BUDGETING IS AS DEFINITIVE FOR PAYING PARTY AS IT IS FOR RECEIVING PARTY: JUDGMENT TODAY

February 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In the judgment today in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 346 (QB) Mrs Justice Carr allowed an appeal about the significance of costs budgeting when it comes to assessment. “In my judgment, the answer to…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE: COSTS BUDGETING AND QADER RESULT CODIFIED

February 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2017 were made on the 3rd February.  Most of these come into force on the 6th April 2017. The new rules are available here COSTS BUDGETING The amendments set out below may be perplexing.  However…

COSTS AT THE END OF A CASE: INDEMNITY COSTS, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT AND GOING BEYOND THE COSTS BUDGET

December 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36, Risks of litigation, Uncategorized

In Barkhuysen -v- Hamilton [2016] EWHC 3371 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered matters relating to costs after a trial. The defendant’s conduct led to an order for indemnity costs being made. The judge also identified those areas in which the claimant…

JUDGE USES COSTS BUDGET TO ASSESS COSTS AT THE END OF A TRIAL: THE RELEVANCE OF THE BUDGET & WHEN SHOULD THE COURT GO OUTSIDE IT?

November 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Sony Communications International AB -v- SSH Communications Security Corporation [2016] EWHC 2985 (Pat) Mr Roger Wyand QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) used the costs budget to carry out an assessment of the costs at the end…

TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE IV: PROPORTIONALITY – A LITIGATOR'S SURVIVAL GUIDE V

November 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

The issue of proportionality raised its head more than once at the recent ACL conference.  However I addressed the issue directly (or perhaps obliquely). My central argument being that proportionality requires a fundamentally different approach to litigation. Further there is…

TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE III: SATELLITE NAVIGATION, MERRIX AND COSTS BUDGETING

November 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

One issue discussed at the Association of Costs Lawyers in Manchester on the 24th October  was the decision in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWHC B28 (QB). The question of whether a detailed assessment is needed…

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DIFFICULTY IN REVISING A BUDGET: AN ACUTE CHANGE OF CASE IS REQUIRED

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DIFFICULTY IN REVISING A BUDGET: AN ACUTE CHANGE OF CASE IS REQUIRED

November 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful to Michael Davidson from Acumension who has sent me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Hovington in the case of Warner -v- The Pennine Acute Hospital NHS Trust  (Manchester County Court 23rd September 2016) (available…

THE PARTIES CANNOT CONTRACT OUT OF COSTS BUDGETING (& A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE)

November 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs budgeting, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

An earlier post dealt with the decision of Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21.  However an earlier ruling in the same case contains a consideration of whether the parties can agree to sidestep budgeting….

COSTS MANAGEMENT AND PROPORTIONALITY IN ACTION

November 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

Issues of costs budgeting and proportionality were considered by Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21. It provides an interesting example of the judicial approach to proportionality and costs budgeting. “Proportionality is fundamental to…

COSTS BUDGETING: PILOT SCHEME IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION IN LEEDS

October 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

 Leeds District Registry has a pilot scheme in relation to costs budgeting. It enables the parties to agree to limit the extent of costs budgeting.  The parties can, by agreement, file a simple costs budget with the Directions Questionnaire. If…

COSTS BUDGETING: IT'S JUST A PHASE I'M GOING THROUGH

October 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

One advantage of going to conferences is that it usually gives rise to ideas for the blog. So speaking at the Association of Costs Lawyers conference yesterday has given rise to a whole host of issues which will be explored…

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET FILED LATE: THE DECISION IN DETAIL

October 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Useful links

We have looked, briefly, at the Court of Appeal decision in Jamadar -v- Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWCA Civ 1001. I am grateful to Aaron Vodden   of  Hempsons for sending me a copy of the transcript which…

A JUDGMENT ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COSTS BUDGETING AND THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: MAPPING & SURVEYING THE TERRAIN

October 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In a judgment given today in Merrix -v-Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust Regional Costs Judge District Judge Lumb  (sitting in Birmingham) considered the extent to which the costs budgeting regime fettered the powers and discretion of the costs judge…

THIS COSTS BUDGETING THING – IT IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT: WELL THINK AGAIN

October 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Disclosure, Members Content, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

There are some important observations made by Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman Limited [2016] EWHC 2315 (Ch) in relation to both costs budgeting and security for costs. KEY POINTS There is no duty on a…

COSTS BUDGETING AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: BUDGETING THE COSTS OF ASSISTANCE AND COUNSEL

September 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision today of Chief Master Marsh in Campbell -v- Campbell [2016] EWHC 2237 (Ch) deals with some important issues in relation to costs budgeting, the costs of litigants in person, instructing counsel and the nature of costs budgeting generally. “……

COSTS BUDGETING IS APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY IN A HIGH VALUE CASE : BUT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL

August 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

In Signia Wealth Limited -v- Marlborough Trust Company Limited [2016] EWHC 2141 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered two issues relating to case management: whether costs budgeting should apply and whether a split trial was appropriate. KEY POINTS Costs budgeting A…

FAILING TO FILE A COST BUDGET AND REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A HARSH LESSON

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Clinical Negligence, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

If a litigation solicitor is ever given the job of designing wallpaper here are the three key things that should form the recurring motif. The costs budget is due 21 days before the first case management conference. Where the claim…

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…

OVERSPENDING ON YOUR COSTS BUDGET? BETTER TELL YOUR CLIENT

June 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

Way back in the mist of time (that is post-Mitchell, pre-Denton) I reported a decision of District Judge Lumb on sanctions and costs budgeting. That particular post was then  plagiarised without any reference to me (matters were resolved amicably). However…

WHAT IS MEANT BY A "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT"? AMENDING THE COSTS BUDGET WHEN CLAIM DOUBLES IN SIZE: CLAIMANT GETS THE BOOT

April 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to barrister Colm Nugent for his notes of the decision of Mr Justice Picken in Churchill -v- Boot (22/04/2016) in relation to costs budgeting (a summary of this case is also available on Lawtel). KEY POINTS A…

NEW RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS TOMORROW: THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS

April 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

Following the post about the rule changes coming into force tomorrow there was some discussion about the transitional provisions. The confusion comes about partly because the SI introducing them says the same thing in different ways.  However further confusion arises…

RULE CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE: 48 HOURS TO GO

April 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

A short, but timely, reminder that new rules come into force on the 6th April 2016. These include: No costs budgeting where the claim is brought on behalf of a child. Normally no costs budgeting when the claimant has limited…

COSTS BUDGET SERVED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED ON APPEAL

April 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In a judgment given today His Honour Judge Peter Gregory allowed an appeal against a decision to confine a claimant’s costs budget to court fees following late service of the costs budget. The case indicates that a more nuanced approach…

COSTS BUDGETING: PROPORTIONALITY; CITY FIRMS & COUNSEL WHEN THERE IS £16 MILLION AT STAKE

March 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Morgan in Group Seven Limited -v- Nasir [2016] EWHC 629 (Ch) provides some interesting observations in relation to costs budgeting.  It demonstrates that issues of proportionality are important even in a case where £16…

COSTS, FIXED COSTS AND COSTS BUDGETING WHEN MAKING AN INTERIM ORDER: ALL IN THE PINK

March 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Birss in Thomas Pink Ltd -v-Victoria’s Secret UK Limited [2014] EWHC 3258 has only recently been posted on Bailii.  However it contains an interesting example of the court considering the issue of costs, fixed costs…

CHANGES TO COST BUDGETING RULES: KEY DATES AND TIMES

March 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

The previous post looked at the changes to costs budgeting coming into force on the 6th April.   Here is a list of the key dates and times. These are key dates in litigation and the sanction for failing to…

IMPORTANT CHANGES TO COSTS BUDGETING: THE KEY POINTS

March 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

New rules in relation to costs budgeting come into force on the 6th April 2016. They apply to proceedings commenced on or after 6th April 2016. EXEMPTION FOR CHILDREN  5. In rule 3.12(1), for subparagraph (c), substitute— “(c) where in…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2015: POETRY, CARPET BOMBING AND DISAPPEARING EXPERTS

December 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Members Content, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

We civil litigators cannot be left out of the, apparently universal, need for  an annual review. The annual review last year was headed with the words “prolixity”, “sanctions” and creative writing.  Here we look at poetry, carpet bombing and disappearing…

COSTS BUDGETING, PROPORTIONALITY AND GROUP LITIGATION

December 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Group Litigation Orders, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine & others [2015] EWHC 3543 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone (sitting with Master Leslie & Chief Master Gordon Saker) considered costs budgeting within a Group Litigation Order. “Recognising that this is a complex case…

NO INDICATIONS GIVEN FROM TRIAL JUDGE IN RELATION TO EXCEEDING COSTS BUDGET: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH TO INTERIM COSTS WHERE THE COSTS HAVE EXCEEDED THE COSTS BUDGET

November 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

Can (and should) the trial judge give any indication in relation to costs budgets at the end of a trial if the costs budgets have been exceeded. Further what is the appropriate approach to an application for interim costs when…

DOES EVERY FIRM NEED A "PROPORTIONALITY" TSAR? PROPORTIONALITY AND SURVIVAL FOR LITIGATORS 3

November 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In January this year I started a series “Proportionality and Survival for Litigators”. I predicted it would be a lengthy series. I want to look at practical ways in which litigators can ensure that costs remain “proportional”. This, most probably,…

DAMNED IF YOU DO: DAMNED IF YOU DON'T: AGREEING COSTS BUDGETS AND COMPLYING WITH THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

October 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

“Are lawyers colluding on fees?”, asked Rachel Rothwell in the Law Society Gazette yesterday.  Rachel was reporting on a concern, albeit a low key one expressed by some judges that parties are “colluding” to keep their fees high in costs…

"HOW TO GET SUED, MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE": 22nd SEPTEMBER 2015: HARDWICKE BUILDING, LONDON: RAISING FUNDS FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR

September 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Service of the claim form, Striking out, Uncategorized, Witness statements

LITIGATORS: HOW TO GET SUED: MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE RAISING MONEY FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR APPEAL (ALL PROCEEDS GO TO THE APPEAL) Gordon Exall and PJ Kirby QC. Hardwicke Building, Lincoln’s Inn. TUESDAY 22nd SEPTEMBER 2015 5.30 -…

PROPORTIONALITY, ASSESSMENT AND THE COSTS OF BUDGETING: SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

August 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In BP -v- Cardiff & Vale University Local Health Board [2015] EWHC B13 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker considered several issues relating to proportionality; the format of bills and the costs of costs budgeting. “Having conducted an assessment of the reasonableness of…

ORDERING SECURITY FOR COSTS, THIRD PARTY ACTIONS AND THE COSTS BUDGET

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

How important is an approved costs budget in determining the sum to be ordered by way of security for costs? This was an issue considered by Mr Justice Andrew Smith in Sarpd Oil International Ltd -v- Addax Energy [2015] EWHC…

ESSENTIAL READING: "FEES A CROWD WHEN JUSTICE AND POLITICS COLLIDE": A NLJ & LSLA PUBLICATION

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There is a section on this  blog devoted to links to posts on procedure and costs. Occasionally, however, a post is so important that I feel compelled to draw attention to it. This definitely applies to the publication “Litigation Trends…

OUCH! THINKING OF DRAFTING A COSTS BUDGET? BEST READ THIS FIRST

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in GSK Project Management Ltd -v- QPR Holdings Ltd [2015] EWHC 2274 (TCC) is one that needs to read by anyone involved in preparing a costs budget. To say the judge was critical of…

STRIKING OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS BECAUSE OF IRRELEVANT MATERIAL AND "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" IN RELATION TO CHANGES OF COSTS BUDGETS

July 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Witness statements

The Mitchell libel case led to a number of interlocutory hearings and applications, some of which had a profound effect on civil procedure (for a while at least). The case of Yeo -v- Times Newspapers Ltd  is also leading to…

HOW TO GET SUED, MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE (2015 EDITION): LEEDS 30th JUNE 2015

June 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content

If you are a litigator and feeling happy, confident and have no concerns at all about getting things wrong, being sued or making a loss, then something may be missing from your life. TO MAKE YOUR LIFE COMPLETE Come to…

COSTS OF EXPERTS AND GOING OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET: THE HIGH COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND BUDGETED ITEMS AFTER A TRIAL

April 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Members Content

In Parish -v- The Danwood Group Ltd [2015] EWHC 940(QB) HH Judge Behrens (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered various issues relating to the costs budget at the end of a trial. THE CASE The claimants were…

TAKING A DIM VIEW OF THE COSTS BUDGET: STRONG WORDS FROM THE TCC: THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF OVERBLOWING THE BUDGET

March 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs budgeting, Members Content

In CIP Properties (AIPT) Limited -v- Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd [2015] EWHC 481 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson had strong words to say about the reliability, reasonableness and proportionality of the claimant’s costs budget. The judge was faced with a very…

MORE ON INDEMNITY COSTS AND THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AT TRIAL: INTERCITY TELECOMS -v- SOLANKI

February 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

NOTE THAT THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL, SEE THE POST HERE  In Intercity Telecom -v- Solanki [2015] Judge Simon Brown QC awarded indemnity costs and assessed costs at the end of a trial. It is…

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

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.