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
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…

AGENCY FEES ALLOWED ON APPEAL:  FULL COPY OF JUDGMENT AVAILABLE

AGENCY FEES ALLOWED ON APPEAL: FULL COPY OF JUDGMENT AVAILABLE

March 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Paul Hughes for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Graham Wood QC in Beardmore -v- Lancashire County Council.  The case considers the paying, and cost, of medical agency fees. A copy of…

PERMISSION TO AMEND GIVEN TO PLEAD COSTS PAID IN PREVIOUS ACTION AS DAMAGES: GAMBLING ON GETTING A SECOND CHANCE

PERMISSION TO AMEND GIVEN TO PLEAD COSTS PAID IN PREVIOUS ACTION AS DAMAGES: GAMBLING ON GETTING A SECOND CHANCE

February 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Damages, Members Content

In Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavora SPA [2019] EWHC 303 (Comm) the High Court granted the claimant permission to amend to include, as a claim for damages, the costs of a previous action. “I have come to…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

February 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post looked at the witness evidence of some of the claimants against one of the defendants in the case of Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC).  Here we look at the…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT DID NOT CONTINUE AFTER A SOLICITOR HAD CEASED TO ACT: DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS TO FIRST SET OF SOLICITORS

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT DID NOT CONTINUE AFTER A SOLICITOR HAD CEASED TO ACT: DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS TO FIRST SET OF SOLICITORS

February 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose TTKW for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Wulwik in Roman -v- AXA Insurance PLC (13/12/2018).   Roman v AXA Insurance [2018] (1) The judge found that a CFA with…

WHEN YOU'VE SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY ON LEGAL COSTS: NO REMEDY AVAILABLE: LITTLE SYMPATHY WHEN YOUR NET INCOME IS THE SAME AS A CIRCUIT JUDGE

WHEN YOU’VE SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY ON LEGAL COSTS: NO REMEDY AVAILABLE: LITTLE SYMPATHY WHEN YOUR NET INCOME IS THE SAME AS A CIRCUIT JUDGE

January 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

This blog usually looks at family cases in the context of evidence or costs.  The decision in Daga v Bangur [2018] EWFC 91 has a salutary tale to tell in relation to costs. There is also an interesting comparison in relation…

DETAILED ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT OVERSTEP THE MARK: THE COURTS WILL NOT (GENERALLY) REVISIT MATTERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE CASE ON ASSESSMENT

DETAILED ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT OVERSTEP THE MARK: THE COURTS WILL NOT (GENERALLY) REVISIT MATTERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE CASE ON ASSESSMENT

January 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting and important  judgment by Deputy Master Friston in  Andrews v Retro Computers Ltd [2019] EWHC B2 (Costs) which highlights the dangers of attempting to use detailed assessment as a means of challenging the receiving party’s conduct.   I…

COURT DID NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO POSTPONE THE PAYMENT OF COSTS: THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT OBTAIN SECURITY FOR COSTS BY OBTAINING AN ORDER DEFERRING PAYMENT OF COSTS

COURT DID NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO POSTPONE THE PAYMENT OF COSTS: THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT OBTAIN SECURITY FOR COSTS BY OBTAINING AN ORDER DEFERRING PAYMENT OF COSTS

January 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Security for Costs

There is an interesting decision today in JSC VTB Bank v Skurikhin & Ors [2019] EWHC 69 (Comm), Andrew Henshaw QC, sitting as a Judge of the High Court. The court refused to delay payment of costs to a defendant…

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST INSURER: UNTANGLING THE WEB

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST INSURER: UNTANGLING THE WEB

January 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Various Claimants v Giambrone & Law (a firm) & Ors [2019] EWHC 34 (QB) a non-party costs order was made against the defendant insurers.  It provides a (fairly complex) example of a court determining a non-party order. This “summary procedure”…

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL IN THE COUNTY COURT

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL IN THE COUNTY COURT

January 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Ho v Adelekun [2019] EWCA Civ 1988, see the discussion here.  I am grateful to Sam Hayman and Tom Jenkinson  from Bolt Burdon Kemp  for sending me a copy…

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL

January 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In November last year I wrote about the case of Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB).  This was a case in which the defendant refused to pay cost incurred prior to issue. Proceedings were issued and…

CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS: DOESN'T GET ADDITIONAL 10%: "UNJUST" CONSIDERED

CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS: DOESN’T GET ADDITIONAL 10%: “UNJUST” CONSIDERED

December 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL, SEE THE POST 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” A claimant who beats their own…

UNANTICIPATED SIZE OF DISCLOSURE WAS AN "UNANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT": UPWARD REVISION OF COST BUDGET ALLOWED

UNANTICIPATED SIZE OF DISCLOSURE WAS AN “UNANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT”: UPWARD REVISION OF COST BUDGET ALLOWED

December 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Disclosure, Members Content

In  Al-Najar & Ors v The Cumberland Hotel (London) Ltd [2018] EWHC 3532 (QB) Master Davison allowed an upward variation of the cost budget.  The scale of disclosure given by the defendant could not have been anticipated and it was reasonable…

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

Recent Posts

  • AN INSURER’S ADMISSION BINDS INSURED DEFENDANT EVEN THOUGH INDEMNITY WAS SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN: APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM THAT ADMISSION DISMISSED…
  • SERVICE POINTS 39: ISSUES OVER CORRECT SPANISH ADDRESS DID NOT RENDER SERVICE INVALID
  • COST BITES 383: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS FOLLOWING “MIXED” SUCCESS AT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION? WHAT IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE AMOUNT? (SOMETHING ABOUT APPROPRIATE DELEGATION AND HOURLY RATES TOO…)
  • WHEN A CASE – WEEKS AWAY FROM TRIAL WAS “UNTENABLE”: HOW DID WE GET HERE?
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 71: COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT PERMISSION TO AMEND EVEN THOUGH THE CURRENT CASE WAS “UNTENABLE”: LESSONS HERE FOR EVERYONE

Top Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT TO WEAR TO COURT: "IF YOU ATTEND COURT DRESSED INAPPROPRIATELY, COURT STAFF MAY REFUSE YOU ENTRY"
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 71: COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT PERMISSION TO AMEND EVEN THOUGH THE CURRENT CASE WAS "UNTENABLE": LESSONS HERE FOR EVERYONE
  • WHEN A CASE - WEEKS AWAY FROM TRIAL WAS "UNTENABLE": HOW DID WE GET HERE?
  • AN INSURER'S ADMISSION BINDS INSURED DEFENDANT EVEN THOUGH INDEMNITY WAS SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN: APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM THAT ADMISSION DISMISSED...
  • COST BITES 383: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS FOLLOWING "MIXED" SUCCESS AT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION? WHAT IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE AMOUNT? (SOMETHING ABOUT APPROPRIATE DELEGATION AND HOURLY RATES TOO...)

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.