THE “CHORLEY PRINCIPLE” CONSIDERED: SOLICITORS NOT ENTITLED TO RECOVER COSTS OF ASSISTANT SOLICITOR WORKING ON HER OWN CASE
In JH v CH & SAP (Costs: the Chorley principle, Litigants in person) [2020] EWCOP 63 HHJ Evans-Gordon considered the “Chorley principle”, the principle that allows a solicitor personally involved in litigation to recover their costs. The judge held that…
CIVIL PROCEDURE ROUND UP: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP: NOVEMBER 2020
This round up covers specific posts and articles in relation to civil procedure from November 2020. COSTS ACL – Lacuna identified in criminal legal aid rules for civil committal proceedings ACL – QOCS does not apply to pre-issue applications, court rules ACL…
INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER A JUDGMENT DEBTOR WAS EXAMINED: IN ADDITION THERE IS GOING TO BE A SECOND MATCH…
In Shearer v Neal [2020] EWHC 3148 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC ordered that a debtor pay costs on the indemnity basis after she heard a Part 71 hearing. The case was also remitted to the High Court Judge on…
COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS AWARD FOR AS TO COSTS ON ACCOUNT: WHAT IS A “REASONABLE SUM”? (£325,000 IN THIS CASE)
In Mousavi-Khalkali v Abrishamchi & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1493 we have a rare case of the Court of Appeal considering an appeal on an order that a party pay a sum on account of costs. THE CASE The Court…
SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: THE SUBSEQUENT COSTS JUDGMENT: AN ADDITIONAL £65,095.65; INDEMNITY COSTS & INCREASED INTERESTS: THE WISDOM OF MAKING A PART 36 OFFER WHEN APPEALING
On the day when it is announced that the Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in the case of Swift -v- Carpenter it is interesting to look at the subsequent judgment on costs given today in Swift v Carpenter…
SECOND DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS CLAIMANT INCURRED IN PURSUING FIRST DEFENDANT: AN UNUSUAL CASE
In Patel v Barlows & Ors (No. 2) [2020] EWHC 2795 (Ch) HHJ Mithani QC (sitting as a High Court judge) found that a defendant was liable to pay the costs of another defendant where the claimant had had to…
SOLICITOR’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Toms (t/a Goldbergs Solicitors) v Brannan [2020] EWHC 2866 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths dismissed a solicitor’s appeal against a decision that he was not able to recover costs from a client after a conditional fee agreement had been terminated….
THE SOLICITOR’S FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THE CLIENT TO EXPLAIN COSTS: FAILURE TO PLACE CAP ON SUCCESS FEE MEANT AGREEMENT WAS UNENFORCEABLE: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Belsner v Cam Legal Services Ltd [2020] EWHC 2755 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender allowed an appeal whereby a firm of solicitors acting on behalf of a claimant were permitted to deduct 25% of the damages in addition to payment…
DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS ON CLAIMANT’S DISCONTINUANCE: A DEED NOT SENT IN TIME
In Hewson v Wells & Ors [2020] EWHC 2722 (Ch) Master Clark varied the usual rule and made no order for costs following the claimant’s discontinuance. “In my judgment, the change in circumstances was brought about by unreasonable behaviour…
GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES (NOT MUCH USE); CANARY WHARF (EXPENSIVE PLACE TO BE); EVIDENCE AND THE SEVEN PILLARS OF WISDOM (ALL FOR £750 AN HOUR)
I am grateful to Tom Jenkinson from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Rowley in Shulman -v- Kolomoisky (24/06/20) where the issue of the guideline hourly rates was determined. A copy of the…
WE LOST, BUT WE STILL WANT 90% OF OUR COSTS: CLAIMANT’S UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL: A DEVELOPING FIELD OF LAW?
The judgment of Mr Justice Miles in Terracorp Ltd v Mistry & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 2623 (Ch) contains an interesting review of the principles relating to costs where a party has failed on a number of issues. It…
COSTS ORDERED AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT WHEN CLAIMANT HAD SETTLED AGAINST ANOTHER: A DEFENDANT’S UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL
In Oberholster v Optical Express Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2635 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman dismissed a defendant’s appeal against a costs order against it. The case deals with the problematic issue of costs if a claimant settles the claim…
PROPORTIONAL COSTS: THE LITIGATOR’S WATCHWORDS: 12 PRACTICAL STEPS FOR THE PRUDENT LAWYER…
The issue of “proportionality” is central to contemporary litigation. However it is rarely examined in detail and rarely discussed. Attempts to analyse how proportionality can be achieved are even rarer. Here I reprise some points made several years ago about…
GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES CONSIDERED IN COURT OF PROTECTION: INFLATION CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ON ASSESSMENT
In PLK & Ors (Court of Protection : Costs) [2020] EWHC B28 (Costs) Master Whalan considered the appropriate hourly rate for Deputies in Court of Protection matters. (I am grateful to Carter Burnett, Costs Consultants, for bringing my attention to…
FATAL ACCIDENT: LEGAL COSTS OF ATTENDING INQUEST WERE RECOVERABLE: THE DANGERS TO DEFENDANTS OF MAKING AN EQUIVOCAL “ADMISSION”
In the judgment today in Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service v Veevers [2020] EWHC 2550 (Comm) HHJ Pearce upheld a decision that the legal costs incurred in attending an inquest were recoverable as costs in a subsequent action for…
COURT MAKES 5% REDUCTION IN SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S COSTS RATHER THAN AN ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER
This is the fourth look this blog looks at the judgment in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387. This time we are looking at the question of whether there should be a deduction in…
DATE ON LETTER DID NOT PREVENT IT BEING A VALID PART 36 OFFER: NO ESTOPPEL IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36 OFFERS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall considered arguments relating to the validity of Part 36 offers. He found that the offer the claimant made was a valid Part…
WHEN SHOULD A LITIGATION FRIEND BE LIABLE FOR COSTS? INTERESTING COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Glover v Barker & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 1112 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision where costs were awarded against a litigation friend. It is a particularly important judgment for those acting as litigation friends for defendants. THE…
LEXLAW -v- ZUBERI: PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED
I wrote in July about the decision in Lexlaw Ltd v Zuberi [2020] EWHC 1855 (Ch) (10 July 2020) in relation to the validity of a damages based agreement. Practitioners may like to know that permission to appeal has been granted by…
COSTS BUDGETING: PRECEDENT T: EXCEL VERSION
I am grateful to Sean Linley for sending me an excel version of the new Precedent T. It gives me another chance to remind people of the new rules that come into force and and post photos of cars that…
SERVICE, JURISDICTION AND WASTED COSTS: A CASE TO POINT
We looked earlier at the judgment of Master Cook in Jovicic & Ors v The Serbian Orthodox Church-Serbian Patriarchy [2020] EWHC 2229 (QB) in relation to late service of the claim form. That judgment also considers the wasted costs application….
COUNSEL’S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE
In the judgment today in Finsbury Food Group Plc v Dover [2020] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert rejected the defendant’s arguments that counsel’s fees were not recoverable. “I do not accept that leaving the legal costs of valuing a…
WHEN THE FEE EARNER WITH CONDUCT OF A MATTER IS ALSO THE SOLE DIRECTOR OF THE CLIENT: UPPER TRIBUNAL AWARDS NO COSTS FOR THIS ASPECT OF THE CASE
There is a comment on costs in the judgment of Judge Timothy Herrington in Financial Solutions (Euro) Limited -v- The Financial Conduct Authority [2020] UKUT 0243 (TCC) that has some wider implications, albeit that it is was a relatively unusual…
WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS? IT DEPENDS: COURT CONSIDERS THE RELEVANT TEST
In the judgment today in Blackpool Borough Council v Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd [2020] EWHC 2128 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies, sitting as a judge of the High Court, considered the effect of a withdrawn Part 36 offer. There is an important consideration…
“SUCCESSFUL” CLAIMANT RECOVERS 60% OF HIS COSTS BUT PAYS THE COSTS OF TRIAL: ISSUED BASED COSTS ORDERS CONSIDERED
The vast majority of people who read the cases discussed in this blog will (I would wager a bet) often be thinking “Was there a Part 36 offer?” “What happened about costs?” We can get a glimpse into these issues…
HIGH COURT JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT’S COSTS
In Pegg v Webb & Anor [2020] EWHC 2095 (QB) tMr Justice Spencer overturned a finding of a trial judge that a claimant had not been fundamentally dishonest. The claimant had been dishonest in the failures to give full disclosure…
HEARINGS AND DETAILED ASSESSMENTS IN THE SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE PRACTICE NOTE BY THE SENIOR COSTS JUDGE
Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker has issued a Practice Note in relation to Practice in the Senior Courts Costs Office. “Introduction 1. As a result of the hard work and determination of the court staff and the willingness to adapt…
THE NEW PRECEDENT T: SEE IT HERE: A MODEL OF ITS KIND…
I am grateful to Sean Linley for sending me a copy of the new Precedent T that will apply to amended budgets after the 1st October 2020. You can see it here. Precedent T Example THE NEW RULES…
POINTS TAKEN ON APPLICATION WERE “ALL BAD”: PARTIES TO LITIGATION ARE NOT BOUND TO TAKE BAD OR HOPELESS POINTS
The judgment of Master Davison in Vale SA v BSG Resources Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2021 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on the “state of litigation”. “The points taken on Mr Cramer’s behalf were not a mixture of…
IN-HOUSE COSTS RECOVER ON ASSESSMENT: THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IS NOT BREACHED
The question on the indemnity principle and in-house lawyers was another costs issue considered by Mostyn J in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin). The judge rejected an argument that the successful…
GET YOUR COSTS SCHEDULES TO COURT: OR ELSE (YOU WON’T GET PAID): MAKE YOUR BED AND THEN LIE IN IT
The judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin)has a number of elements that are of interest to costs lawyers, and litigators generally. I am going to…
COUNSEL’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER FIXED COSTS REGIME WHERE CASE SETTLED DAY BEFORE HEARING
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Haworth in Coleman -v- Townsend [SCC Senior Court Costs Office 13th July 2020). A copy of which is available here Final Judgment Coleman…
COSTS ISSUES IN A CASE WHERE THE CLAIMANTS HAVE TO PAY £30 MILLION: WHY IT IS UNWISE TO BANK ON WINNING
A reminder of the sheer size, and major dangers, of group litigation can be seen in the judgment today in Sharp & Ors v Blank & Ors [2020] EWHC 1870 (Ch). The judgment relates to the costs of the action…
VALIDITY OF A DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND CLIENT UPHELD: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to Lexlaw ltd for bringing my attention to the judgment of HHJ Parfitt (sitting as a High Court Judge in Lexlaw Ltd v Zuberi [2020] EWHC 1855 (Ch) (10 July 2020). They have sent me their Note…
THE CAP ON RECOVERABLE COSTS OF COSTS BUDGETING IS EXCLUSIVE OF VAT: JUDGMENT TODAY
In Marbrow v Sharpes Garden Services Ltd [2020] EWHC B26 (Costs) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker considered the issue of whether the cap on recoverable costs of the costs assessment process are inclusive, or exclusive of value added tax. (There are…
“OUR CASE WAS SO HOPELESS YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT”: LOSING PARTY SHOULD PAY THE COSTS OF CLAIMANTS PURSUING SPECULATIVE CLAIM: YOU CAN’T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT
The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert today in Bailey & Anorv Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1766 (QB) reflected the normal rule that the losing party should pay the costs of an action. In this case the losing party was…
NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER AND PART 36 BENEFITS APPLIED WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Scales v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2020] EWHC 1749 (QB) Mr Justice Cavangh rejected the defendant’s submission that there should be an issue based costs order and awarded a claimant the usual Part 36 benefits when he beat his own…
JUDGMENT SET ASIDE BECAUSE OF LOCKDOWN (2): WHO PAID THE COSTS? SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE
A post earlier today dealt with the case of Stanley v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2020] EWHC 1622 (QB) where a regular judgment was set aside because proceedings had been served, essentially, on empty offices. What will be of…
FARMER -v- THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF LANCASHIRE: COSTS DISALLOWED IN FULL: FULL JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE
I wrote yesterday about the two useful articles on the case of Farmer v The Chief Constable of Lancashire [2019] EWHC B18 (Costs). The full judgment is now available on BAILLI. “Anybody around this table being of the costs persuasion…
WHEN MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT LEADS TO NO AWARD OF COSTS
It is illuminating to read two reports of the case of Farmer -v- the Chief Constable of Lancashire, where a party’s conduct on assessment led to no award of costs being made. Indeed the claimant was ordered to pay the…
WEBINARS ON LAW, PROCEDURE AND DAMAGES: READ ALL ABOUT THEM…
Since lockdown has made giving live presentations impossible I have been involved in presenting a number of webinars. This would seem a good time to set them out. Those that have been given earlier this year are still available on…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE, ALLEGATIONS OF MALINGERING AND INDEMNITY COSTS (AGAINST THE DEFENDANT)
I had no sooner finished a webinar about surveillance evidence this afternoon when I received an email and a copy of a case from solicitor Steve Evans.* The judgment of HHJ Yelton (sitting in the High Court) in Kilbey -v-…
THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES 80: THE POSTS SO FAR
The “back to basics” series has been going since April 2018. It has covered a surprising amount of topics. From how to draft an application to “litigation wishful thinking”. Two years on this is a good time to recap on…
“THERE MAY BE WORSE EXAMPLES OF DISPROPORTIONATE AND ILL-JUDGED LITIGATION, BUT NOT SPRING READILY TO MIND”: SPEND £600,000 OF COSTS AND GET £5,000 EACH
When I trespass into the area of family law it is, almost invariably, about the issue of costs. A prime example of the dangers of litigation and costs, almost literally, wiping all the family assets out, can be seen in…
CORONAVIRUS LAW: COVID NOT A GOOD REASON TO CHANGE NORMAL RULE AS TO COSTS FOLLOWING DISCONTINUANCE
In Khan v Governor of HMP The Mount & Anor [2020] EWHC 1367 Mr Justice Spencer considered, and rejected, an argument that a different costs order should be made because of the impact of coronavirus. THE CASE The claimant…
INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED WHERE DEFENDANT ASKED FOR JSM BUT MADE NO OFFER: “A WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY”
On the Kings Chambers website there is a report, and transcript, of the decision in EAXB v. University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust: 4-8th November 2019 and 6th January 2020. The report is of a case where the claimant was successful…
CIVIL PROCEDURE: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – MAY 2020
As we adjust to the problems of the pandemic some of the more conventional issues of litigation have been dealt with extensively this month. Costs ACL Trio of High Court judges issue costs penalties to defendants that refused ADR ACL Claimant not…
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: UNDER SPEND OF A PHASE – NOT A GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE BUDGET
In Utting v City College Norwich [2020] EWHC B20 (Costs) Master Brown rejected an argument that an “underspend” amounted to a good reason to depart from a budget. I am grateful to Paul Kay from R Costings for drawing this…
THE (NOT SO) LONELY LITIGATOR’S CLUB 25: CLAIRE GREEN: THE COST LAWYER’S TALE (OR TWO TAILS IN FACT)
Our club is going to need a costs lawyer or two. So for our first costs lawyer member I went straight to the top. Claire Green is currently Chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers ( ACL) as well as…
COVID REPEATS 25: COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT RECEIVES NOMINAL DAMAGES: YOU’VE TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION, RECEIVED £2 & NOW HAVE TO FACE THE CONSEQUENCES
Failing to beat a Part 36 offer is always painful. Failing to beat an offer of £1.5 million and receiving £2 is, most probably, even more painful. Here we look at the second part of the case discussed yesterday. In Marathon…
You must be logged in to post a comment.