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 » Page 18
CASE FALLING OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: ASSAULT BY A VULNERABLE ADULT: REPORT OF A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION: FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY

CASE FALLING OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: ASSAULT BY A VULNERABLE ADULT: REPORT OF A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION: FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to solicitor John McQuater for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Hickinbottom in Gibbons -v- Rotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust (o4/06/2019).  It concerns the question of whether an assault by…

RECOVERING THE COST OF ATTENDING THE INQUEST: MUST BE BOTH RELEVANT AND PROPORTIONATE (BUT PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT MONEY)

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Proportionality

The judgment today in Fullick & Ors v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1941 (QB) deals with the, often challenging, question of whether the costs of attending an inquest is recoverable in cases where the claimant…

COURT REFUSES TO MAKE ORDER THAT A DEFENDANT DISCLOSES FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS

COURT REFUSES TO MAKE ORDER THAT A DEFENDANT DISCLOSES FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS

July 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

In Rudd v Bridle & Anor [2019] EWHC 1986 (QB) Mr Justice Warby refused a claimant’s application for disclosure of the defendants’ funding arrangements.   “Beyond this is the common-sense point, that the Court will not be keen to allow…

NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO RECOVER £25,000 FOR LEADING COUNSEL TO ATTEND A LOW LEVEL HEARING  - NOT EVEN ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO RECOVER £25,000 FOR LEADING COUNSEL TO ATTEND A LOW LEVEL HEARING – NOT EVEN ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Timokhina v Timokhin [2019] EWCA Civ 1284 the Court of Appeal overturned an order that a mother pay counsel’s fees of certain hearings. The judgment is interesting in that costs were disallowed (inter partes) as unreasonable even when the…

PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In West -v- Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220 the Court of Appeal considered the question of proportionality in relation to clinical negligence actions and the “recoverable” element of ATE insurance.  I am grateful to Sean Linley for…

APPEAL ON COSTS BUDGETING : CLAIMANT'S APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL: AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME THE BENCHMARK FIGURE

APPEAL ON COSTS BUDGETING : CLAIMANT’S APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL: AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME THE BENCHMARK FIGURE

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

In Gray v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1780 (QB) Mr Justice Lambert dismissed the claimant’s appeal from cost budgeting decisions.    The judgment contains important observations about the nature of cost budgeting hearings and appeals on…

PROPORTIONALITY: SHOULD HINDSIGHT BE A FACTOR? EXTRACTS FROM O'HARE AND BROWNE ON CIVIL LITIGATION (YOU SAW IT HERE FIRST...)

PROPORTIONALITY: SHOULD HINDSIGHT BE A FACTOR? EXTRACTS FROM O’HARE AND BROWNE ON CIVIL LITIGATION (YOU SAW IT HERE FIRST…)

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

I am grateful to John O’Hare for sending me an extract from the next edition of O’Hare and Browne on Civil Litigation (19th edition). It deals with proportionality and, in particular,  whether hindsight should be a factor in assessing proportionality. …

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53A: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES: ALI -v-CHANNEL 5

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53A: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES: ALI -v-CHANNEL 5

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Relief from sanctions

Shortly after I completed the post on Part 36 offers after the costs budget has been confined to court fees Professor Dominic Regan reminded me that there is another example in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES

July 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This may be an ambitious subject for the back to basics series. However here I want to look at the situation where a party has failed to file their costs budget timeously and the budget has been confined to court…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 51: BULLOCK AND SANDERSON ORDERS: COSTS WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 51: BULLOCK AND SANDERSON ORDERS: COSTS WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS

July 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

When writing the previous post about a Bullock order it struck me that there may be some people not quite certain of what a “Bullock order ” or “Sanderson order” is. This gives rise to a need to explain those…

THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH

THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH

July 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  Fouladi v Darout Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1674 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr refused an appeal against the making of a “Bullock” order in relation to the costs of a fourth defendant.  The claimant, however, was not successful…

PART 36 OFFER WAS NOT AN EFFECTIVE ONE AND DEFENDANT HAD TO PAY COSTS

PART 36 OFFER WAS NOT AN EFFECTIVE ONE AND DEFENDANT HAD TO PAY COSTS

July 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  Bull v Desporte [2019] EWHC 1669 (QB) Mr Justice Knowles rejected the defendant’s argument that a Part 36 offer meant that she did not have to pay costs. THE CASE The claimant succeeded in an action for misuse of…

INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: REASONS FOR REFUSING PERMISSION NOW AVAILABLE ON LINE

INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: REASONS FOR REFUSING PERMISSION NOW AVAILABLE ON LINE

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

I wrote on the judgment in  I – interim payment of costs.  in an earlier post . I subsequently wrote that the defendant had been refused permission to appeal. The reasons are available on the Switalskis website, here. ” it seems entirely…

RULE CHANGES (109): ELECTRONIC FILING, INCURRED COSTS AND THE CCMC, SMALL CLAIM HEARINGS IN PRIVATE

RULE CHANGES (109): ELECTRONIC FILING, INCURRED COSTS AND THE CCMC, SMALL CLAIM HEARINGS IN PRIVATE

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes

We are now on the 109th update to the Civil Procedure Rules.  The three points I want to look at in particular are: mandatory electronic filing in the QBD; the costs of the CCMC being clearly categorised as incurred costs;…

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL IN RECOVERING ADDITIONAL 10% IN DAMAGES WHEN OWN OFFER WAS BEATEN: THE ADDITIONAL AWARD SHOULD NOT BE CATEGORISED AS A "BONUS"

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL IN RECOVERING ADDITIONAL 10% IN DAMAGES WHEN OWN OFFER WAS BEATEN: THE ADDITIONAL AWARD SHOULD NOT BE CATEGORISED AS A “BONUS”

June 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  JLE v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Trust Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1582 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart overturned an order of the Master who declined to award the claimant an additional 10% in costs when they had beat their…

LITIGATION THAT WAS "TOTALLY OUT OF PROPORTION": THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE CUT THEIR CASE TO SUIT THEIR CLOTH: (SOMETHING ABOUT BUNDLES TOO)

LITIGATION THAT WAS “TOTALLY OUT OF PROPORTION”: THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE CUT THEIR CASE TO SUIT THEIR CLOTH: (SOMETHING ABOUT BUNDLES TOO)

June 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Case Management, Members Content

In White Winston Select Asset Funds LLC & Anor v Mahon & Anor [2019] EWHC 1381 (Ch) HHJ Simon Barker QC had some telling words about the manner in which the claimant had conducted litigation.  What is remarkable about this…

AN OFFER THAT IMPOSES A CONDITION AS TO COSTS IS NOT A VALID PART 36 OFFER: MERE FAILURE TO ACCEPT REASONABLE OFFER DOES NOT LEAD TO INDEMNITY COSTS

AN OFFER THAT IMPOSES A CONDITION AS TO COSTS IS NOT A VALID PART 36 OFFER: MERE FAILURE TO ACCEPT REASONABLE OFFER DOES NOT LEAD TO INDEMNITY COSTS

June 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Knight & Anor v Knight & Ors (Costs) [2019] EWHC 1545 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) held that an offer that attempted to limit costs was not a valid Part 36 offer.   The judge…

APPEAL AGAINST DISPROPORTIONAL COSTS FAILS: REASONABLE TO USE LEADING COUNSEL IN A £25,000 CLAIM

APPEAL AGAINST DISPROPORTIONAL COSTS FAILS: REASONABLE TO USE LEADING COUNSEL IN A £25,000 CLAIM

June 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In East Sussex Fire And Rescue Service v Austin [2019] EWHC 1455 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert dismissed the defendant’s (paying party) appeal. The defendant argued that costs were disproportional, that the use of leading counsel was unreasonable  – as was…

COSTS & CASH FLOW: PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PART WAY THROUGH AN ACTION: INTERIM PAYMENTS AND COST EFFECTIVE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION (ITS THE POST OFFICE CASE AGAIN)

COSTS & CASH FLOW: PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PART WAY THROUGH AN ACTION: INTERIM PAYMENTS AND COST EFFECTIVE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION (ITS THE POST OFFICE CASE AGAIN)

June 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

The one certainty in litigation at the moment is that the Bates -v- Post Office case is going to keep providing plenty of material on evidence, procedure and costs.  We see this in the judgment Bates & Ors v Post…

PROPORTIONALITY: A WARNING AGAINST A "CLIENT-CENTRIC" APPROACH: £74,000 REDUCED TO £15,000: HIGH COURT CASE ON APPEAL

PROPORTIONALITY: A WARNING AGAINST A “CLIENT-CENTRIC” APPROACH: £74,000 REDUCED TO £15,000: HIGH COURT CASE ON APPEAL

June 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Malmsten v Bohinc [2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch) Mr Justice Marcus Smith allowed a paying party’s appeal in an assessment and reduced a bill from £74,328.90 to £15,000.  There is a detailed consideration of how the proportionality test should be…

COSTS AGAINST CHILDREN AND LITIGATION FRIENDS: COURT HAS A DISCRETION TO ORDER COSTS AGAINST CHILD LITIGANTS

COSTS AGAINST CHILDREN AND LITIGATION FRIENDS: COURT HAS A DISCRETION TO ORDER COSTS AGAINST CHILD LITIGANTS

June 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In  the judgment today in Barker v Confiànce Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1401 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered whether costs could be ordered against child claimants and/or their litigation friend. He found that no special principles apply to prevent…

MASTER ENTITLED TO STRIKE OUT UNPARTICULARISED GROUNDS OF DISPUTE  IN SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: BE PARTICULAR OR ELSE...

MASTER ENTITLED TO STRIKE OUT UNPARTICULARISED GROUNDS OF DISPUTE IN SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: BE PARTICULAR OR ELSE…

June 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Striking out

In Ainsworth -v- Stewarts Law LLP [2019] EWCA Civ 897 HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge) dismissed an appeal against an order dismissing a former client’s challenge to work done on documents. The Master held that the claimant’s…

PART 36 OFFER ON HOURLY RATE WAS VALID: HOWEVER INJUSTICE TEST MEANT CLAIMANT WOULD NOT RECOVER AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT: MERE GAMESMANSHIP SHOULD BE AVOIDED

PART 36 OFFER ON HOURLY RATE WAS VALID: HOWEVER INJUSTICE TEST MEANT CLAIMANT WOULD NOT RECOVER AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT: MERE GAMESMANSHIP SHOULD BE AVOIDED

May 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In White & Anor v Wincott Galliford Ltd [2019] EWHC B6 (Costs) Deputy Master Friston considered the effect of a Part 36 offer on the hourly rates to be applied on an assessment of costs.  It was held that the…

A CAVALCADE OF COSTS CASES:  HOLIDAY READING:  SOMETHING TO CHEER UP COST LAWYERS OVER THE BANK HOLIDAY WEEKEND...

A CAVALCADE OF COSTS CASES: HOLIDAY READING: SOMETHING TO CHEER UP COST LAWYERS OVER THE BANK HOLIDAY WEEKEND…

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

A number of costs cases have arrived on BAILLI all are decisions of Master Rowley relating to costs. EXCLUDING INTEREST ON COSTS MEANS THAT THIS IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER Ngassa v The Home Office & Anor [2018] EWHC…

APPELLANT'S COSTS OF APPEAL WERE "MANIFESTLY UNREASONABLE" : COURT OF APPEAL  REDUCES £71,072 SCHEDULE TO £13,000

APPELLANT’S COSTS OF APPEAL WERE “MANIFESTLY UNREASONABLE” : COURT OF APPEAL REDUCES £71,072 SCHEDULE TO £13,000

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

A short postcript to the Court of Appeal judgment in Jofa Ltd & Anor v Benherst Finance Ltd & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 899 makes some telling remarks about the cost of appeals. “the amount of costs claimed by the…

PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS THAT STATES IT IS "EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST" IS STILL A VALID OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS THAT STATES IT IS “EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST” IS STILL A VALID OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to barrister Jamie Carpenter for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Nicol in Horne -v- Prescot (No 1) Ltd 2019 1322 (QB). The case relates to whether a Part 36 offer on costs,…

PROVING THINGS 150: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT THE MOVE FROM LEGAL AID TO CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS A REASONABLE STEP

PROVING THINGS 150: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT THE MOVE FROM LEGAL AID TO CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS A REASONABLE STEP

May 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Experts, Members Content

In YZ v Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC B4 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker found that the claimant had not established good grounds for changing from legal aid to a conditional fee agreement.   Although this is a costs issue, it…

REASONABLE COSTS WERE PROPORTIONATE: MORE THAN MONEY AT STAKE - COSTS NOT REDUCED

REASONABLE COSTS WERE PROPORTIONATE: MORE THAN MONEY AT STAKE – COSTS NOT REDUCED

May 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Various Claimants (In Wave  2 of the Mirror Newspapers Hacking Litigation) v MGN Ltd[2018] EWHC B19  Master Saker had to consider the issue of proportionality of costs directly, and held that – on the facts of that case -…

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 4: TIME ESTIMATES FOR HEARINGS (AND WHY YOU SHOULD VISIT KINGSTON UPON HULL)

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 4: TIME ESTIMATES FOR HEARINGS (AND WHY YOU SHOULD VISIT KINGSTON UPON HULL)

May 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There were difficult choices to be made when delegates selected their particular lectures at the recent APIL conference. In a show of northern solidarity (and because I am interested in these kind of things) I went to see District Judge…

COSTS, COSTS LAWYERS, RESERVED AND UNRESERVED ACTIVITIES: PAYING PARTIES' ARGUMENTS LARGELY UNSUCCESSFUL

COSTS, COSTS LAWYERS, RESERVED AND UNRESERVED ACTIVITIES: PAYING PARTIES’ ARGUMENTS LARGELY UNSUCCESSFUL

May 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

In  Allen v Brethertons LLP [2019] EWHC B3 (Costs) Master Leonard determined that the work done by a cost lawyer, and the team working with her, were recoverable costs.  I am grateful to Mark Carlisle for drawing my attention to…

COURT COULD NOT GO OUTSIDE FIXED COSTS REGIME: HOWEVER AN ORDER SEEKING INDEMNITY COSTS IS NOT AN "INTERIM" APPLICATION

COURT COULD NOT GO OUTSIDE FIXED COSTS REGIME: HOWEVER AN ORDER SEEKING INDEMNITY COSTS IS NOT AN “INTERIM” APPLICATION

May 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose    for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Carr in Parsa -v- D.S. Smith PLC (25th March 2019)  Parsa v D.S. Smith PLC – Approved Judgment -…

NEW PRECEDENT R: STARTED TODAY (CONTAIN YOUR EXCITEMENT): USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

NEW PRECEDENT R: STARTED TODAY (CONTAIN YOUR EXCITEMENT): USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

April 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes

Credit to Costs Lawyer Jessica Swannell for reminding people on Linked In that the new Precedent R must be used from today.  It is a good time to provide a link to the new form and some useful posts and…

A CASE WHERE LAWYERS BECOME RESPONDENTS TO THE ACTION WHERE A PARTY IS SEEKING TO RECOVER COSTS: ALSO WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE

A CASE WHERE LAWYERS BECOME RESPONDENTS TO THE ACTION WHERE A PARTY IS SEEKING TO RECOVER COSTS: ALSO WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE

April 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Technically speaking, the judgment of Mrs Justice Andrews in Willers v Joyce & Ors [2019] EWHC 937 (Ch) is about the “without prejudice” rule. However the point that has caught everyone’s attention is the fact that lawyers, previously  acting for…

FIXED COSTS, CASES OVER £25,000, EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASKET OF CASES

FIXED COSTS, CASES OVER £25,000, EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASKET OF CASES

April 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In Ferri v Gill [2019] EWHC 952 (QB)Mr Justice Stewart considered the relevant criteria to be applied when a claimant argued that fixed costs should not be applied to a case that had started in the portal but was settled…

FIXED COSTS WHEN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION SETTLES FOR MORE THAN £25,000: "NEW RULES" TO BE APPLIED AND FIXED COSTS APPLY

FIXED COSTS WHEN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION SETTLES FOR MORE THAN £25,000: “NEW RULES” TO BE APPLIED AND FIXED COSTS APPLY

April 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to  Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose TTKW  for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Sephton QC in  Lovatt -v- Lew Diecastings Ltd (County Court in Manchester, 4th December 2018).  Lovatt v LEW Diecastings Ltd…

COURT FEE REMISSION: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

COURT FEE REMISSION: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

April 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Useful links

The earlier post reporting that a defendant had been ordered to pay the claimant’s court fees despite the claimant being entitled to remission has led to a lot of discussion on Twitter. Responses range from “that’s right” to “what on…

BARRISTERS' FEES ARE "PROPERTY": COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY (A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE TOO...)

BARRISTERS’ FEES ARE “PROPERTY”: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY (A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE TOO…)

April 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Gwinnutt v George & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 656 the Court of Appeal held that a barrister’s fees (paid under the old pre-contractual arrangements) were, in fact,  “property” (at least for the purpose of insolvency).  There is also an…

ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COURT FEES SENT TO COVENTRY

ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COURT FEES SENT TO COVENTRY

April 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

I am grateful to Michael Fletcher from Glaisyers Solicitors LLP for sending me a copy of a note of a judgment from Coventy County Court yesterday in  Cook -v- Malcolm Nicholls Limited.  It is a case concerning whether the claimant…

LIMITS ON THE DUTY OF COUNSEL TO ADVISE ON COSTS AND FUNDING: ALSO PARTICULARS OF CLAIM - IF YOU CAN'T PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY ITS PROBABLY INDICATIVE OF A POOR CASE

LIMITS ON THE DUTY OF COUNSEL TO ADVISE ON COSTS AND FUNDING: ALSO PARTICULARS OF CLAIM – IF YOU CAN’T PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY ITS PROBABLY INDICATIVE OF A POOR CASE

April 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Striking out

The judgment in Andrews & Ors v Messer Beg Ltd [2019] EWHC 911 (Ch) contains an interesting discussion on a barrister’s duty to advise on the funding of litigation.  The Part 20 claimant, having had the particulars of claim struck out, …

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHERE MONEY PAID 17 HOURS LATE:"A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NECESSARY"

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHERE MONEY PAID 17 HOURS LATE:”A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NECESSARY”

April 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Summary assessment,

In Khandanpour v Chambers [2019] EWCA Civ 570 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in relation to a refusal to give relief from sanctions.  A delay in payment of 17 hours of part of the moneys ordered by the…

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

April 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision on a solicitor and own client assessment that the additional liability in a simple personal injury case should be 15%. It allowed…

COSTS, MEDICAL AGENCIES, VAT:  SOLICITORS CAN RECOVER VAT PAID TO MEDICAL AGENCIES ON ASSESSMENT

COSTS, MEDICAL AGENCIES, VAT: SOLICITORS CAN RECOVER VAT PAID TO MEDICAL AGENCIES ON ASSESSMENT

April 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In British Airways Plc v Prosser [2019] EWCA Civ 547 the Court of Appeal considered whether it was appropriate for a claimant’s solicitor to recover the costs of VAT paid to medical agencies. THE CASE The claimant succeeded in a…

DEPARTING FROM THE BUDGET: IMPORTANT DECISION ON APPEAL: JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE

DEPARTING FROM THE BUDGET: IMPORTANT DECISION ON APPEAL: JUDGMENT NOW AVAILABLE

March 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Both Professor Dominic Regan and Acumension have kindly sent me copies of the decision in Barts Health NHS Trust -v-Salmon an appeal in relation to costs budgeting (HHJ Dight CBE, with Master Brown as an assessor, 17th January 2019).  A copy…

ADVICE FOR THE ASPIRANT OR TYRO LAWYER: WHEN TWITTER CAN BE YOUR FRIEND (IN FACT YOU CAN HAVE DOZENS OF FRIENDS GIVING YOU ADVICE)

ADVICE FOR THE ASPIRANT OR TYRO LAWYER: WHEN TWITTER CAN BE YOUR FRIEND (IN FACT YOU CAN HAVE DOZENS OF FRIENDS GIVING YOU ADVICE)

March 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized

This is a post started almost by accident.  It started with a tweet when a barrister was happy to be sitting on her sofa, for a change and said this is the reality of legal life.  It led to dozens…

WHO HAS WON AND WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? WHEN “WHO PAYS THE CHEQUE” IS NOT A SUFFICIENT ANSWER

March 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Hamad M Aldrees & Partners v Rotex Europe Ltd [2019] EWHC 526 (TCC)  Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart considered a case where it was far from clear that the “winning” party should recover its costs,  The case is useful in that it…

INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD

INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD

March 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Jim Gladman from Switalskis, solicitors for sending me a copy of the approved judgment of HHJ Robinson in I -v- Hull & East Yorkshire NHS Trust (25th February 2019).  A copy of that judgment is available…

WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: A "CUT OUT AND KEEP" GUIDE: A JUDGMENT ON INTEREST OF INTEREST

WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE: A JUDGMENT ON INTEREST OF INTEREST

March 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in Assetco Plc v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2019] EWHC 592 (Comm) provides a helpful review of the principles and authorities relating to the approach to be adopted when a claimant beats their own Part…

"THE CLAIMANTS MUST RUE THE DAY THEY REJECTED THE DEFENDANT'S OFFER": CLAIMANT TO PAY STANDARD COSTS AFTER REJECTING VERY EARLY PART 36 OFFER

“THE CLAIMANTS MUST RUE THE DAY THEY REJECTED THE DEFENDANT’S OFFER”: CLAIMANT TO PAY STANDARD COSTS AFTER REJECTING VERY EARLY PART 36 OFFER

March 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The costs judgment in  Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn [2019] EWHC 369 (TCC) is probably a judgment that should be shown to all litigants.  The claimant rejected an offer of £25,000 and failed to beat that offer at trial.   The defendant’s…

ALLEGED "MISCONDUCT" DURING ASSESSMENT PROCESS DID NOT LEAD TO COSTS BEING DISALLOWED OR REDUCED: ATE PREMIUM WAS REASONABLE

ALLEGED “MISCONDUCT” DURING ASSESSMENT PROCESS DID NOT LEAD TO COSTS BEING DISALLOWED OR REDUCED: ATE PREMIUM WAS REASONABLE

March 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Murray v Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 539 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart rejected an argument that mistakes made by a claimant during the assessment of costs process should have led to costs being disallowed or reduced. The…

TERMINATING A CFA WITH GOOD REASON: NO NEED FOR SOLICITORS TO WAIT FOR GODOT: ADVICE ABOUT "SETTLEMENT" COVERS THE MAKING OF AN OFFER

TERMINATING A CFA WITH GOOD REASON: NO NEED FOR SOLICITORS TO WAIT FOR GODOT: ADVICE ABOUT “SETTLEMENT” COVERS THE MAKING OF AN OFFER

March 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Butler v Bankside Commercial Ltd [2019] EWHC 510 (QB) Mr Justice Turner upheld a decision of Master Yoxall holding that a client was liable to pay their solicitor’s costs after a conditional fee agreement came to an end when the…

← Previous 1 … 17 18 19 … 30 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)
  • PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES INTRODUCED YESTERDAY: NEW PROVISIONS IN THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL: “OTHER REMEDY” CLAIMS CAN NOW BE MADE
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 15: THE STUDENTS LOAN COMPANY MAY BE AN “EMANATION OF THE STATE”: SOME INTERESTING ISSUES HERE: THESE ARE ISSUES OF LAW – NOT ONE ON WHICH A WITNESS CAN EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW…
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A “HYPOTHETICAL” RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT’S ACTION FAILED

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.