COST BITES 91: CONVERSION OF CURRENCY WHEN A RECEIVING PARTY HAS PAID ITS LAWYERS IN EUROS
We have looked before at the case helpfully sent by Nicholas Lee Paragon of Costs Solutions , in Micula and others v Romania [2023] UKSC 2018/0177 (23 May 2023). Here we look at that part of the judgment that deals…
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…
BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL: THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND
We have looked at the decision in relation to costs in the case of ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWHC 986 (KB) in an earlier post. The decision on costs, and the primary judgment on…
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…
COST BITES 89: A SUPREME COURT ORDER FOR COSTS CONSTRUED: COSTS WERE (ESSENTIALLY) RESTRICTED TO PAYMENT OF ONE PARTY, TWO SILKS AND ONE JUNIOR
I am grateful to Nicholas Lee Paragon of Costs Solutions for sending me details of the decision in Micula and others v Romania [2023] UKSC 2018/0177 (23 May 2023) where Costs Judge Leonard and Costs Officer Sewell considered the specific…
COST BITES 88: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE AGAINST AN AGENCY SEEKING A BREAKDOWN OF FEES
I am grateful to Ryan O’Mara of Scott Rees & Co for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Jenkinson in Sephton -v- Anchor Hanover Group (County Court at Liverpool, 20th April 2023 – a copy of which…
RULE CHANGES ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 2023: FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS AND ALL THAT: LOOKING AHEAD – A QUICK GLANCE AT THE PRIMARY SOURCES
The rules introducing the “Intermediate Track” for cases between £25,000 and £100,000 are now published, they come into force on the 1st October 2023. There are links to the source material below. A more detailed guide to the changes will…
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…
COSTS BITES 86: COSTS OF INSTRUCTING LEADING COUNSEL IN A £115,000 CLAIM WERE NOT RECOVERABLE: A LITIGANT CANNOT “DEPLOY UNLIMITED RESOURCES TO FIGHT CASES AND EXPECT TO RECOVER THOSE COSTS FROM THE LOSING PART”
In Coram v D R Dunthorn & Son Ltd [2023] EWHC 731 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Joseph affirmed his original decision on provisional assessment that the costs of instructing leading counsel to attend a three day trial were not recoverable…
COST BITES 85: JUDGE HAD THE POWER TO MAKE COSTS ORDER WHICH INCLUDED COSTS OF APPLICATIONS AGAINST NON-PARTY
In McCarthy v Jones & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 589 the Court of Appeal refused an appeal against a decision that an unsuccessful party pay the costs involved in applications against a non-party. The trial judge had a discretion to…
COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL
I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for providing me with a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust -v- Hoskin, County Court at Manchester22nd May 2023, a copy is available here HoskinsAppealJudgment. …
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 81: A SUCCESSFUL APPELLANT GETS THEIR COSTS: THE COURT WOULD NOT GIVE A “BLANK CHEQUE IN RELATION TO PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS
There are two matters of interest in the Court of Appeal judgment in R (On the Application Of) v Thanet District Council (Re Costs) [2023] EWCA Civ 526. Firstly the court’s rejection of an argument that the successful party had…
Costs and the administration of estates: Kings Chambers Costs Team Webinar: 18th May 2023
On the 18th May 2023 at 4.00 pm my colleagues at Kings Chambers Matthew Smith and Andrew Hogan are presenting a webinar on costs and the administration of estates. “the consideration that professional advisers should generally be paid for their…
COST BITES 81: SOLICITOR WORKING UNDER A CFA HAS A DUTY TO KEEP CLIENT INFORMED OF THE “STAGGERINGLY HIGH LEVEL OF COSTS” IN THE ACTION, INCLUDING EXPERTS: HIGH COURT DECISION
There is much for litigators to learn from the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Forster v Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP [2023] EWHC 1150 (Ch). Here I want to concentrate upon one element of the case – the need to…
INTEREST ON DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY CANNOT BE USED AS A MEANS OF PENALISING A DEFENDANT FOR POOR BEHAVIOUR: PART 36 ISSUES ALSO CONSIDERED
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Smout v Wulfrun Hotels Ltd [2023] EWHC 1128 (KB) considers the question of the use of interest as a penalty for the poor conduct of a defendant. The judge held that interest should…
COSTS BITES 80: WHERE THE BILL OF COSTS WAS FOR IMAGINARY WORK AND “JUST FICTION”: ASSESSMENT SHINES A CLEAR LIGHT OF DEFICIENCES IN BILLS: AT SUBSTANTIAL COST TO THE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITOR
The judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in Ikin -v- Shawbrook Bank Limited [2023] EWHC 1075 (SCCO) contains many, many lessons of importance for those drafting and those signing bills of costs. The judge found that there were manifold failures…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 95: ACCEPTING A PART 36 OFFER WHEN THERE IS MORE THAN ONE DEFENDANT
This post arises out of an interesting question I was asked in a recent webinar on Part 36.* The questioner asked wanted to accept a Part 36 offer by one defendant and continue the action against others. The situation here…
COST BITES 79: JUDGE AWARDS GUIDELINE RATES EVEN IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL CASE
In Manek & Ors v 360 One WAM Ltd & Ors (Re Consequentials) [2023] EWHC 985 (Comm) Simon Rainey KC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) declined to award rates that were higher than the Guideline Rates in…
THE EXTENSION OF FIXED COSTS: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDES
The extension of fixed costs is a major topic. I will write about the practical implications when we are nearer to the implementation date. In the interim there are some useful links and guides. THE RULES The new rules…
COST BITES 78: A CASE WHERE A LAWYER WAS CONFINED TO LITIGANT IN PERSON RATES
In Wilson v Emmott [2023] EWHC 816 (KB) Mr Justice Saini (sitting with Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker as a costs assessor) rejected a lawyer’s appeal against a decision that the lawyer was only entitled to recover costs on the basis…
COST BITES 77: JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT TERMS OF DISCOUNTED CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS MEANT THE SOLICITORS WERE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY COSTS OF ALL: COMPULSORY READING HERE – AND MUCH TO THINK ABOUT
The judgment of Judge Brown, sitting as a Master of the Kings Bench, in Ascension Asset Management Ltd & Anor v Sky Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWHC 875 (KB) should be mandatory reading for any litigator who enters into a retainer…
COST BITES 76: COURT DID NOT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST HEALTH AUTHORITY IN A WELFARE CASE: THERE ARE OTHER WAYS A COURT CAN SHOW ITS DISAPPROVAL OF A PARTY’S CONDUCT OF A CASE
In West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust v AX (Rev1) [2023] EWCOP 11 Vikram Sachdeva KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused an application for costs against a health authority. The judgment contains a review of the rules relating to…
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…
COST BITES 74: CLAIMANTS HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS OF DISCONTINUED APPLICATION FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: COUNTING THE COPPERS
In Beck & Ors v Police Federation of England and Wales (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 685 (KB) Senior Master Fontaine held that the claimants should pay the costs of an – abandoned – application for a Group Litigation Order. “I…
PART 36 RULES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: WAS THE OFFER MADE IN TIME? WAS THE OFFER VALID? WHEN DOES A TRIAL “START”? WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY?
The judgment of Andrew Sutcliffe KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Mate v Mate & Ors [2023] EWHC 806 (Ch) involves a consideration of several issues in relation to Part 36. The judge decided that a Part 36…
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…
HEARING AND TRIAL BUNDLES: ARE THE COSTS OF PREPARATION RECOVERABLE? WELL, YES THEY ARE (IN PART)
There was some discussion on Twitter earlier this evening as to whether the cost of preparing bundles is recoverable at all. Since we have not had a case featuring a judicial complaint about bundles for several months* and “bundle cases”…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 30th MARCH 2023
The changes to the rules as to the set off of QOCS for action issued on or after the 6th April 2023 makes the proper assessment of Part 36 offers of even more importance. Not only will the costs incurred…
MAKE UNJUSTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN A LETTER OF CLAIM AT YOUR PERIL – YOU CAN PAY THE COSTS: ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS
The judgment of Deputy Master Nurse in Stubbins Marketing Ltd & Ors v Rayner Essex LLP & Anor [2023] EWHC 515 (Ch) contains an important lesson for anyone drafting a letter of claim. The judge ordered that the claimants pay…
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…
PART 36, COSTS: THE JUDGE WAS CORRECT NOT TO FIND THAT PART 36 CONSEQUENCES SHOULD NOT APPLY: A DISPUTE “CONDUCTED IN AN ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE WAY AND AT ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE COST”
In Lampor & Ors v Jones [2023] EWHC 667 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor dismissed the appeals by both parties in relation to costs orders made following Part 36 offers. The trial judge had held that the defendant had failed to…
COST BITES 73: APPEAL ON HOURLY RATES DID NOT GO AS THE APPELLANT PLANNED: THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT
In Harlow District Council v Powerrapid Limited (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 586 (KB) Mr Justice Choudhury, sitting with Costs Judge Rowley as an assessor, rejected an appeal about the hourly rates allowed by the costs judge. There are important passages about…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER – MAXIMISING RECOVERY ON ASSESSMENT: WEBINAR 6th APRIL 2023
I am presenting a webinar on the 6th April 2023 – The Costs Judge Over Your Shoulder 2023 – Maximising recovery. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR “Here the reduction was very large and the reason for the reduction was…
COSTS BITES 73: IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION THE APPLICANTS FAILED TO GET PAST THE FIRST STAGE
In King & Ors v Stiefel & Ors [2023] EWHC 453 (Comm) Mr Justice Jacobs refused to allow a wasted costs application to pass stage one of the process. The issues were too complex and the costs to high, to…
COST BITES 72 : COSTS BETWEEN CREDITOR AND SUPPLIER UNDER THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT: CREDITOR’S ARGUMENT HITS A (BLACKPOOL) ROCK
Barrister Henry King has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment in Pennington -v- Creation Financial Services Ltd, a decision of District Judge Woosnam in the County Court at Blackpool, a copy of which is available here Pennington v…
COST BITES 60: THE COURT WOULD NOT RETROSPECTIVELY REALLOCATE A CASE TO THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK:
I am grateful to Craig Leigh for sending me copies of two judgments of Recorder David Allen K.C. in the case of Johnson -v- GE Money Secured Loans Ltd. The second judgment in relation to costs contains a decision on…
REDUCING THE RISKS OF ADVERSE COSTS ORDERS IN CIVIL LITIGATION: WEBINAR 23rd MARCH 2023
With the changes coming into place in relation to QOCS on the 6th April 2023 it is now more important than ever that claimants avoid adverse costs orders. This webinar looks at the best and safest means of litigating to…
FIXED COSTS STILL APPLIED AFTER AN ADJOURNMENT AND TWO ABORTED TRIALS: COVID WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL TIME BUT DID NOT GIVE RISE TO EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Lindsey Moan in the case of Osuzuwa -v- Madeira, a copy of which is available here Osuzuwa v Madeira. The judge…
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…
NO ORDER FOR COSTS WHEN AN APPLICATION HAD BEEN ADJOURNED DUE TO AN INAPPROPRIATE TIME ESTIMATE
In Harrington Scott Ltd v Coupe Bradbury Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWHC 294 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, decided that the costs of an application that was adjourned due to an inappropriate time estimate should not…
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. …
COST BITES 59: COSTS AGAINST THE CLAIMANT EVEN THOUGH THE DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: HOWEVER THE JUDGE FELT TOTALLY UNABLE TO RELY ON A COSTS SCHEDULE
Another example of costs not following the event can be seen in the judgment of Mrs Justice Smith in The Financial Conduct Authority v Papadimitrakopoulos & Anor [2022] EWHC 3048 (Ch). The judgment also raises other issues in relation to…
COSTS BITES 58: SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN A PREMIER LEAGUE CASE: COSTS SHOULD NOT TOTALLY OVERSHOOT THE POST
There is an interesting decision as to costs in the judgment of Mr Justice Miles in The Football Association Premier League Ltd v Pattie & Ors [2023] EWHC 296 (Ch) in relation to the assessment of costs when a case…
COST BITES 57: ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE COSTS AFTER SETTLEMENT: YOU CAN’T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT (COURT OF APPEAL VERSION)
There have been some interesting decisions recently on issue based costs orders and costs not always following the event. In Tradition Financial Services Ltd v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 112 the Court of Appeal upheld a…
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER THAT CLAIMANT REDRAW BILL OF COSTS DISMISSED: EXPERIENCE OF FEE EARNERS IS A MATTER FOR THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCESS
An interesting point was considered by Costs Judge Nangalingam in Brierley v Otuo & Ors [2023] EWHC 275 (SCCO). The defendant paying party argued that a bill of costs should be redrawn. One of the grounds for the application was…
COST BITES 56: IF YOU DISCONTINUE AGAINST A DEFENDANT YOU HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS
In Lendlease Construction (Europe) Ltd v AECOM Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 2855 (TCC) Mrs Justice Joanna Smith held that a claimant that was discontinuing against one of the defendants in an action should pay the costs. There was no…
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 …
You must be logged in to post a comment.