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
ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?

ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?

April 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to my colleague Steven Turner for sending me a copy of this interesting decision which relates to Part 36, fixed costs and applications to “re-band” a case.  The case may be unusual in that an application for…

PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026 (UPDATED)

PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026 (UPDATED)

April 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

Last month I wrote about the Practice Note in relation to Summary Assessments that take place in the Rolls Building from the 14th April 2026.  That Practice Note was superseded by a further Practice Note issued yesterday. (In other words…

MAZUR MATTERS 59: REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THIS AROSE BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN'T KNOW (OR APPLY) THE CORRECT RULES AS TO FIXED COSTS

MAZUR MATTERS 59: REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THIS AROSE BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN’T KNOW (OR APPLY) THE CORRECT RULES AS TO FIXED COSTS

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fixed Costs, Members Content

One underlying irony about the Mazur debacle is that most of the problems arise because of a mistake as to costs.  The Circuit Judge ordered Ms. Mazur and Mr Stuart £10,653 when, in fact, the costs should only have  been £636.00. …

COST BITES 376: THE NEED TO KEEP THE CLIENT INFORMED OF COSTS BEING INCURRED: THE SOLICITOR SHOULD HAVE INFORMED THE CLIENT THAT COSTS OF US $35,343,213.96 WERE BEING INCURRED

COST BITES 376: THE NEED TO KEEP THE CLIENT INFORMED OF COSTS BEING INCURRED: THE SOLICITOR SHOULD HAVE INFORMED THE CLIENT THAT COSTS OF US $35,343,213.96 WERE BEING INCURRED

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This judgment highlights the need for a solicitor to keep the client fully informed of the costs incurred. The judge observed that the SRA Code of Conduct imposed a positive duty on a solicitor to give the client the best…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS' BILLS

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS’ BILLS

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There have been a large number of posts recently relating to solicitor and own costs assessments.  Many of these cases have related to the issue of whether bills delivered were “statute” bills “interim statute bills” or   simply interim bills. The…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION

April 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In this case a wasted costs order was made against a firm of solicitors for breach of warranty of authority. The stated to the defendant and the court, and believed, that they were instructed by the claimant’s insurers when, in…

COST BITES  375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: "VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL"

COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”

April 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Last month we looked at a case where a series of interim bills were found to be statutory bills.  Today we look at a case where the court came to the opposite conclusion.  This has important practical consequences in that…

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS:  NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”

April 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

If you could not attend the webinar on the practical implications of  the Court of Appeal decision in Mazur yesterday it is now available “on demand”.  The Mazur decision confirms that authorised individuals may delegate tasks within the conduct of…

COST BITES 374: IF THIS WAS A CBA THE UNILATERAL ABILITY TO VARY RATES WOULD HAVE LED TO IT BEING SET ASIDE ON THE GROUNDS IT WAS UNREASONABLE

COST BITES 374: IF THIS WAS A CBA THE UNILATERAL ABILITY TO VARY RATES WOULD HAVE LED TO IT BEING SET ASIDE ON THE GROUNDS IT WAS UNREASONABLE

April 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing with our examination of a case we looked at yesterday. The court found that the agreement between the parties was not a Contentious Business Agreement.  However the judge also stated that it it had been a CBA…

COST BITES 373: THIS ENGAGEMENT LETTER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT: "CERTAINTY" IS AN ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT

COST BITES 373: THIS ENGAGEMENT LETTER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT: “CERTAINTY” IS AN ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT

April 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In this case the court considered whether a solicitor’s letter of engagement amounted to the creation of a Contentious Business Agreement.  It was held that there was too much uncertainty for this to be a CBA. The failure to set…

COST BITES 372: BILL REDUCED FROM £2.6 MILLION TO £750,000: WHY SUMMARY ASSESSMENTS CAN MATTER (A LOT...)

COST BITES 372: BILL REDUCED FROM £2.6 MILLION TO £750,000: WHY SUMMARY ASSESSMENTS CAN MATTER (A LOT…)

April 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

For many years now we have been looking in detail at summary assessments.  On occasion the sums involved, and the reductions that take place, can be considerable. We have such a case here.  An initial schedule of £2.6 million (excluding…

COST BITES 371: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT IN ACTION: THE RESPONDENT'S SENSIBLE APPROACH SAVED TIME BUT INVESTIGATION WAS NEEDED

COST BITES 371: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT IN ACTION: THE RESPONDENT’S SENSIBLE APPROACH SAVED TIME BUT INVESTIGATION WAS NEEDED

April 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing with the practice of looking at what actually happens in summary assessments. These are rarely looked at in detail elsewhere. This case is also interesting in that, although the respondents adopted a “neutral” approach to the application…

COST BITES 370: THE OTHER PART OF THE CAR PARKING SAGA: COURT AWARDS COSTS AGAINST THE CLAIMANT IN A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK CASE

COST BITES 370: THE OTHER PART OF THE CAR PARKING SAGA: COURT AWARDS COSTS AGAINST THE CLAIMANT IN A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK CASE

April 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we return to the case considered in the previous post.  The judge refused to allow the claimant’s representative a right of audience in a Small Claims Track case.  This was a Small Claims Track case, however the judge then…

MAXIMISING RECOVERY IN INTER PARTIES COSTS: THE ROLE OF THE FEE EARNER: WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026: 12.00 pm: TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU OBTAIN MAXIMUM RECOVERY ON ASSESSMENT

MAXIMISING RECOVERY IN INTER PARTIES COSTS: THE ROLE OF THE FEE EARNER: WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026: 12.00 pm: TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU OBTAIN MAXIMUM RECOVERY ON ASSESSMENT

April 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs

This webinar examines the crucial role of the fee earner in maximising the recovery of legal costs. Many litigators have limited experience of detailed assessments and may be unaware of the challenges that can arise during the process. The session…

COST BITES 369: SOMETIMES LITIGATION IS MORE ART THAN SCIENCE: "BANKSY" ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER ACTION DISCONTINUED, BUT NOT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER

COST BITES 369: SOMETIMES LITIGATION IS MORE ART THAN SCIENCE: “BANKSY” ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER ACTION DISCONTINUED, BUT NOT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER

April 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we have a case where the claimant discontinued. Discontinuance made the claimant liable to pay costs.  However in this case it was ordered to pay costs on the indemnity basis (from a key date).   The judge then considered the…

IF YOU MISSED THE WEBINAR ON INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION IT IS NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"

IF YOU MISSED THE WEBINAR ON INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION IT IS NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”

March 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

The webinar on informing the client about the costs of litigation is now available “on demand” and  details can be found here.      THE REASONS FOR THE WEBINAR Recent Legal Ombudsman decisions show that solicitors’ firms are being ordered…

COST BITES 368: THERE WERE NO "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE" WHICH MEANT THE SOLICITOR'S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED OUT OF TIME: THERE IS NOTHING THAT CALLS FOR AN EXPLANATION

COST BITES 368: THERE WERE NO “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE” WHICH MEANT THE SOLICITOR’S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED OUT OF TIME: THERE IS NOTHING THAT CALLS FOR AN EXPLANATION

March 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content

We are returning to the previous case to look at the second half of the Cost Judge’s decision.   Having determined that the bills were statute bills the judge then considered whether there were “special circumstances” which would entitle the claimant…

COST BITES 367: THE SOLICITOR'S TERMS OF BUSINESS MEANT THAT BILLS RENDERED WERE EACH FINAL BILLS: THE TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WERE "UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR"

COST BITES 367: THE SOLICITOR’S TERMS OF BUSINESS MEANT THAT BILLS RENDERED WERE EACH FINAL BILLS: THE TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WERE “UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR”

March 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The issue of whether “interim” bills rendered by solicitors were “statute” bills or “Chamberlain” bills is one that can have profound practical importance. If they are not statute bills then they may be open to a Solicitors Act assessment. If…

COST BITES 364: THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CPR IS "PAY AS YOU GO": JUDGE SUMMARILY ASSESSES COSTS  OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT ISSUES AT £109,576 PLUS VAT

COST BITES 364: THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CPR IS “PAY AS YOU GO”: JUDGE SUMMARILY ASSESSES COSTS OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT ISSUES AT £109,576 PLUS VAT

March 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Summary assessment,

Here we are returning to a case we looked at yesterday.   The judge granted the claimant summary judgment on certain issues.  The defendants elected not to attend the application.  The defendants were ordered to pay costs on the indemnity basis. …

THE IMPORTANCE OF  SOLICITORS' ESTIMATES IN RELATION TO COSTS: SOME EXAMPLES WHERE PROBLEMS HAVE OCCURRED (WITH A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON THE 19th MARCH)

THE IMPORTANCE OF SOLICITORS’ ESTIMATES IN RELATION TO COSTS: SOME EXAMPLES WHERE PROBLEMS HAVE OCCURRED (WITH A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON THE 19th MARCH)

March 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs

The recent short series on this site about the Ombudsman and estimates of costs highlighted the issues that can occur when there are disputes over costs and the original figures given by the solicitor.  However the Ombudsman is not the…

PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026: COSTS SCHEDULES SHOULD BE FILED USING EXCEL SPREADSHEETS

PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026: COSTS SCHEDULES SHOULD BE FILED USING EXCEL SPREADSHEETS

March 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

NB THIS PRACTICE NOTE WAS REPLACED ON THE 14th APRIL – BEFORE IT WAS BROUGHT INTO FORCE – IT WAS REPLACED WITH A FURTHER NOTE, SEE THE BLOG POST HERE  The Chancellor of the High Court has issued a Practice…

DECISION TODAY IN RELATION TO RECOVERABILITY AND ASSESSMENT OF FEES CHARGED BY MEDICAL REPORTING ORGANISATIONS: ANOTHER ROUND IN A VERY LONG WAR...

DECISION TODAY IN RELATION TO RECOVERABILITY AND ASSESSMENT OF FEES CHARGED BY MEDICAL REPORTING ORGANISATIONS: ANOTHER ROUND IN A VERY LONG WAR…

March 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are looking at another round in the ongoing “costs of medical reporting organisations” series of battles. As the judge anticipated this may well not be the last round. Here I provide a brief summary of the conclusions.  A more…

COST BITES 363: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF A HEAVY COMMERCIAL APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT IN PRACTICE: £87,698 REDUCED TO £70,158.64 (BUT NOT TO £39,460): "COMPARATIVE SPEND CAN BE A CROSS-CHECK; IT IS NOT DETERMINATIVE"

COST BITES 363: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF A HEAVY COMMERCIAL APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT IN PRACTICE: £87,698 REDUCED TO £70,158.64 (BUT NOT TO £39,460): “COMPARATIVE SPEND CAN BE A CROSS-CHECK; IT IS NOT DETERMINATIVE”

March 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

We are continuing with the practice of looking at summary assessments. These receive relatively little attention, however they can play a large part in the economics of litigation.  Here we see some interesting arguments in relation to hourly rates, the…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 7: HEADING OFF PROBLEMS AT THE OUTSET: (WEBINAR THIS THURSDAY 19th MARCH 2026 - WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS)

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 7: HEADING OFF PROBLEMS AT THE OUTSET: (WEBINAR THIS THURSDAY 19th MARCH 2026 – WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS)

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

This short series has aimed to highlight the ongoing difficulties that litigators, in particular, can have with giving compliant costs information to their clients.  In looking at this topic it is clear that there are numerous cases where clients have…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 6: YOU SAID IT WOULD COST £2,500 - £3,000 - I'VE PAID YOU £16,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING ESTIMATES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 6: YOU SAID IT WOULD COST £2,500 – £3,000 – I’VE PAID YOU £16,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING ESTIMATES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This decision emphasises the fact that when giving costs estimates the solicitor should also do their best to estimate the costs of disbursements in addition to their own costs.  Here the solicitor mentioned that there would be additional costs if…

COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT

COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT

March 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

An earlier post related to this case which deals with the question of whether a party should provide a breakdown of an invoice from a translator. Ben Williams KC has kindly provided me with a copy of the judgment. “In my judgment,…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 5: DISCOURAGING THE USE OF A BTE POLICY (THIS IS NOT GOOD NEWS FOR THE SOLICITOR...)

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 5: DISCOURAGING THE USE OF A BTE POLICY (THIS IS NOT GOOD NEWS FOR THE SOLICITOR…)

March 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We continue with our examination of the Legal Ombudsman’s decisions about costs.  The issue here was whether the solicitors were correct to discourage the use of an BTE policy and act privately taking out ATE insurance. “It is expected by…

CAN A DEFENDANT MAKE A PART 36 OFFER THAT ATTEMPTS TO BIND THE CLAIMANT IN RELATION TO MATTERS NOT PLEADED?

CAN A DEFENDANT MAKE A PART 36 OFFER THAT ATTEMPTS TO BIND THE CLAIMANT IN RELATION TO MATTERS NOT PLEADED?

March 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we have an interesting, and important, point about CPR Part 36. Firstly could a defendant establish that a claimant had not beaten a Part 36 offer when that offer dealt with matters that were not part of the pleaded…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 4: GOING OUTSIDE THE LEVEL OF LEGAL INSURANCE COVER

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 4: GOING OUTSIDE THE LEVEL OF LEGAL INSURANCE COVER

March 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at a decision in relation to legal expenses insurance. The solicitor had gone outside the cover of the insurance but not informed the client.  The Ombudsman’s conclusions on this issue are not a great surprise… “The…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 3: FAILURE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF FUNDING

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 3: FAILURE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF FUNDING

March 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing with our examination of Legal Ombudsman decisions on issues relating to costs.  Here there was an finding of inadequate service because of a failure to consider whether the client had legal insurance that cover the costs involved….

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 2: POOR COSTS INFORMATION: NOT INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT COSTS UNTIL TWO YEARS INTO THE RETAINER...

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 2: POOR COSTS INFORMATION: NOT INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT COSTS UNTIL TWO YEARS INTO THE RETAINER…

March 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are taking a close look at several Legal Ombudsman decisions in relation to costs, more particularly information about costs in litigation.  Here the firm of solicitors did not provide any information about potential costs for a year after being…

COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK

COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK

March 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Andrew Hogan for sending me a copy of this decision which relates to pre-allocation costs in housing cases. It deals with the question of how the court should address pre-allocation costs where a housing disrepair claim…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 1 : WHILST COSTS CAN BE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT THE FIRM SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ESTIMATE BASED ON THEIR PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE...

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 1 : WHILST COSTS CAN BE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT THE FIRM SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ESTIMATE BASED ON THEIR PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE…

March 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We continue with our examination of recent Legal Ombudsman decisions in relation to providing estimates of costs in particular.  Here we have a finding that the information given as to the costs of litigation was inadequate.   “Whilst I appreciate…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD

March 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

It is a busy day for Court of Appeal decisions on procedure. Here we have an important judgment on Part 36.  What are the costs consequences if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer when the case is subject to…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD - DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD – DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Part 36

The Court of Appeal has heard an appeal against the decision in Laura Attersley v UK Insurance Limited [2025] EWHC 884 (KB).   This is an interesting decision on Part 36.  I understand that judgment is pending.  This was one of many…

COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR'S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY...)

COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR’S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY…)

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Default judgment,, Members Content

Here we have an appeal by a paying party on a highly technical point. The appeal failed.  It highlights the dangers of (i) permitting a default certificate to be entered; (ii) taking technical points which (as the Court observed) led…

COST BITES 358: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE PARTIES HAVE COMPROMISED AN APPLICATION BUT CANNOT AGREE ON WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS?

COST BITES 358: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE PARTIES HAVE COMPROMISED AN APPLICATION BUT CANNOT AGREE ON WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS?

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There are occasions where the parties agree the terms of an application but cannot agree who should pay the costs – the court is asked to adjudicate.   There are difficulties for the judge in this situation.  In particular judges are…

COST BITES 359: FAILING TO SIGN CONSENT ORDER LEADS TO £44,000 IN COSTS: "GOING SILENT" IS NOT A CHEAP OPTION...

COST BITES 359: FAILING TO SIGN CONSENT ORDER LEADS TO £44,000 IN COSTS: “GOING SILENT” IS NOT A CHEAP OPTION…

February 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Just a quick warning  here about the costs of not signing a consent order having agreed to so something.  It can be expensive. We have a case here where it cost £44,000 when the claimant made an application because the…

COST BITES 358: JUDGE DOES NOT  AWARD COSTS ON AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT (INITIALLY) ASKED FOR TOO MUCH

COST BITES 358: JUDGE DOES NOT AWARD COSTS ON AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT (INITIALLY) ASKED FOR TOO MUCH

February 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

It is not unusual for a party, on an interlocutory application, to put in a schedule of costs that covers the entire action. Sometimes this is justified, often it is not.  Here we have a case where this backfired.  The initial…

PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER - YES THEY CAN]

PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER – YES THEY CAN]

February 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment here considers an interesting point in relation to Part 36.  The judge had, in the substantive judgment, considered issues relating to the interest to be paid by the defendant.  The defendant had failed to beat a Part 36…

COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED...)

COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED…)

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Ben Williams KC for sending me a note of the judgment yesterday which was the appeal against the decision in Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025). The second time…

COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE "AT LARGE"

COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE “AT LARGE”

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

Here we are considering a Court of Appeal decision about what costs order should be made when an action is transferred from a  fixed costs regime  to one where costs are at large. On the face of it the decision…

COST BITES 355: VARYING A BUDGET (3): PROPOSED VARIATIONS DISALLOWED BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MADE "PROMPTLY"

COST BITES 355: VARYING A BUDGET (3): PROPOSED VARIATIONS DISALLOWED BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MADE “PROMPTLY”

February 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

This is the final part of today’s trilogy considering applications to vary costs budget.  We have already seen that the judge determined that many issues in the case were “significant developments” which could, in theory, lead to a variation of…

COST BITES 354:  VARYING A BUDGET (2) HOW WAS THE ISSUE OF "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" CONSIDERED IN PRACTICE?

COST BITES 354: VARYING A BUDGET (2) HOW WAS THE ISSUE OF “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” CONSIDERED IN PRACTICE?

February 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The previous post looked at the judge’s consideration of the principles relating to variations in a costs budget.  Here we look at how this worked out in practice with the judge considering whether various issues amounted to “significant developments”.  Some…

COST BITES 353: VARYING A COSTS BUDGETS (1): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED: WHAT IS MEANT BY "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS"?

COST BITES 353: VARYING A COSTS BUDGETS (1): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED: WHAT IS MEANT BY “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS”?

February 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are taking a detailed look at a judgment that deals with proposals to vary costs budgets.  This post will look at the judge’s considerations of the rules, principles and guidance that relates to variation of budgets.  Later posts will…

COST BITES 351: WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE COSTS BUDGETS IN PRACTICE? "COMPARE AND MATCH" IS NOT ALWAYS AN ACCURATE GUIDE:THE KEY QUESTION IS - WHO WILL BE DOING THE MOST WORK?

COST BITES 351: WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE COSTS BUDGETS IN PRACTICE? “COMPARE AND MATCH” IS NOT ALWAYS AN ACCURATE GUIDE:THE KEY QUESTION IS – WHO WILL BE DOING THE MOST WORK?

February 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The previous post looked at the judge’s general observations in this case. Here we look how those principles were applied in practice.  It is clear that the arguments that the costs were excessive by way of comparison did not always…

COST BITES 350: KNOWING HOW JUDGES APPROACH BUDGETING WHEN ONE SIDE SEEKS MUCH MORE THAN ANOTHER:  IS THE COURT A "SLAVE TO COMPARISON"?

COST BITES 350: KNOWING HOW JUDGES APPROACH BUDGETING WHEN ONE SIDE SEEKS MUCH MORE THAN ANOTHER: IS THE COURT A “SLAVE TO COMPARISON”?

February 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

It is always important, and enlightening, to have a close look at judicial observations on the nature of costs budgeting. We have a useful judgment here.  The judge considered the applicable principles and guidance before carrying out budgeting in a…

COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR

COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting comment at the end of the judgment. The judge made an order for security for costs. However he also expressed concern that the defendant’s  estimated costs did not include anything in relation  to the costs of…

COST BITES 347: CLAIMANTS FAILURE TO "CUT THEIR CLOTH" MEANT COSTS OF BUDGETING PROCESS WERE REDUCED BY 20%

COST BITES 347: CLAIMANTS FAILURE TO “CUT THEIR CLOTH” MEANT COSTS OF BUDGETING PROCESS WERE REDUCED BY 20%

February 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting

We have seen several cases where an “overambitious” costs budget has led to a reduction  or disallowance in the costs of budgeting. We have another example here.  The claimants were effectively given a second chance to produce budgets having had…

COST BITES 346: CONDUCT,  "PART 36 OFFERS" AND THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ON A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: THE COSTS OF "ASSESSMENT" ARE DISTINCT TO THE COSTS OF "PROCEEDINGS"

COST BITES 346: CONDUCT, “PART 36 OFFERS” AND THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ON A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: THE COSTS OF “ASSESSMENT” ARE DISTINCT TO THE COSTS OF “PROCEEDINGS”

February 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In this judgment given yesterday a Costs Judge considered the relevance of conduct in a Solicitors Act assessment. In particular whether an offer expressed as a “Part 36 offer” by the claimant client could amount to “special circumstances” to displace…

1 2 … 29 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

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 67 : YOU CANNOT RELY ON THE DEFENDANTS’ ALLEGED SILENCE AS AN EXCUSE TO ATTEMPT AN UNPLEADED CASE THROUGH THE BACK DOOR
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?
  • THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN “UNFOCUSED” MANNER: A “MOVEABLE FEAST” IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”

Top Posts

  • THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN "UNFOCUSED" MANNER: A "MOVEABLE FEAST" IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 67 : YOU CANNOT RELY ON THE DEFENDANTS' ALLEGED SILENCE AS AN EXCUSE TO ATTEMPT AN UNPLEADED CASE THROUGH THE BACK DOOR
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE

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.