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 19
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…

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Parties to actions

An earlier post dealt with the judgment in  McDermott -v- Inhealth Limited (19/07/2018) in relation to costs liability when a claimant settled against some, but not all, defendants in a clinical negligence case. That judgment was sent to me by Thomas Riis-Bristow, Associate…

COSTS AND "ABSURD" CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION...

COSTS AND “ABSURD” CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION…

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

This blog rarely looks at family cases. When it does it is often in relation to costs.  Which is why the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in ABX v SBX [2018] EWFC 81 caught my eye. It raises one fundamental dilemma…

THE ASSIGNMENT  (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER'S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN

THE ASSIGNMENT (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER’S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN

December 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC 3322 (QB) the proposed appellant did not get permission to appeal against a decision that an assigned (or novated) CFA remained valid. THE CASE The claimant argued that conditional fee agreements he had…

BACK TO BASICS 17: WHEN SHOULD A COST BUDGET BE FILED: WHERE THINGS GO WRONG

BACK TO BASICS 17: WHEN SHOULD A COST BUDGET BE FILED: WHERE THINGS GO WRONG

December 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

This may appear very basic. However I have seen both sides falling foul of this very recently. In particular the fact that the budget has to be filed with the directions questionnaire when the claim is limited to £50,000. THE…

COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES "OPEN" IS INAPPROPRIATE

COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES “OPEN” IS INAPPROPRIATE

November 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful  Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp to for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Jacobs in Yirenki -v- Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 3102 (QB).  The judge allowed an appeal against a cost budgeting…

RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: "NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE"

RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: “NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE”

November 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are interesting (and important) observations on the running up of costs in the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in WG v HG [2018] EWFC 70.  This blog does not normally follow family law cases. However the question of costs is…

THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT

THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT

November 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

There is an interesting judgment in Britned Development Ltd v ABB AB & Anor [2018] EWHC 3142 (Ch) which should be read by anyone thinking of withdrawing a Part 36 offer.   The defendants in this case made a Part 36 offer…

SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE GUIDE 2018

SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE GUIDE 2018

November 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

The new Senior Court Costs Office Guide has been published. This replaces the 2013 version with immediate effect. It is available on the link in the page here. The new guide Deals with all changes since 2013. Deals with the electronic…

COURT HAS NO POWER TO MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS ON ACCOUNT AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

COURT HAS NO POWER TO MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS ON ACCOUNT AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content, Part 36

NB THIS DECISION WAS NOT ACCEPTED AND EFFECTIVELY OVERRULED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Global Assets Advisory Services Ltd & Anor v Grandlane Developments Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1764. It was held that the court does have a…

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Brown in Whitaker v Richard Slade & Company Plc [2018] EWHC B17 (Costs) may have some interesting implications for solicitor and own-client costs.  In particular the finding that an agreement in relation a specific sum for work…

DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE

DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

I am grateful to Barrister Kevin Latham for sending me details of the decision of HHJ Venn in Waring -v- McDonell [2018] EW Misc B11 (CC). A link to the full decision is also available at the foot of Kevin’s…

RESPONDENTS ALLOWED TO COMMENT AT HEARING : NEVERTHELESS SURVIVES A COSTS ORDER ON APPEAL

RESPONDENTS ALLOWED TO COMMENT AT HEARING : NEVERTHELESS SURVIVES A COSTS ORDER ON APPEAL

November 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Bhogal & Anor v Knight [2018] EWHC 2952 (Ch) the appellants failed in their appeal following an order that the respondent pay the costs of their initial application. The procedure described in the judgment is instructive.  It was yet another…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5:  IF YOU DON'T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5: IF YOU DON’T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

November 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the High Court decision in Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB). It is one of those cases that illustrate…

PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR'S COSTS CASE

PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR’S COSTS CASE

October 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment in  Gill v Heer Manak Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2881 (QB) is one of those cases that will get costs lawyers excited.  However it is not so much a case about costs as a case about evidence, or the absence…

COSTS REDUCED BY 25% : SEPARATE COSTS OF CLAIM AND COUNTERCLAIM: INCREASED COSTS WHEN LITIGATING AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON

COSTS REDUCED BY 25% : SEPARATE COSTS OF CLAIM AND COUNTERCLAIM: INCREASED COSTS WHEN LITIGATING AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON

October 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

In Bank St Petersburg PJSC & Anor v Arkhangelsky & Ors [2018] EWHC 2817 (Ch) Mr  Justice Hildyard considered the appropriate costs order after a lengthy trial. THE CASE There has been a lengthy trial (between February – July 2016) where…

"PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED": ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

“PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED”: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

October 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Kay, R (On the Application Of) v Scan-Thors (UK) Ltd & Anor (Costs) [2018] EWHC 2842 (Admin) the Divisional Court dealt robustly with arguments made by an interested party attempting to resist an order for costs. “Put bluntly, these submissions…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR'S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE - THREE TIMES

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR’S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE – THREE TIMES

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In  Lyons v Fox Williams LLP [2018] EWCA Civ 2347 the Court of Appeal turned down the claimant’s appeal.  The claimant had been unsuccessful in an action for professional negligence against a firm of solicitors. He was equally unsuccessful on appeal….

CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? PROCEEDINGS NOT DELAYED BECAUSE THERE ARE PENDING APPEALS

CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? PROCEEDINGS NOT DELAYED BECAUSE THERE ARE PENDING APPEALS

October 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In Sberbank of Russia v The OJSC International Bank of Azerbaijan [2018] EWHC 2777 (Comm)Mr Justice Bryan had to consider whether to adjourn a case management conference pending appeals in other cases.  The judge considered the overriding objective and held that…

COSTS IN AN ESTATE CLAIM:  REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION WAS A FACTOR TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION

COSTS IN AN ESTATE CLAIM: REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION WAS A FACTOR TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION

October 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister  James Miller  for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Truman in Nicholls -v- Nicholls (19th June 2018), available here   NICH19062018APP.  The judgment is solely concerned with costs in relation to an action…

INDEMNITY COSTS: CAN BE AWARDED WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES FOUR DAYS INTO A SIX WEEK TRIAL

INDEMNITY COSTS: CAN BE AWARDED WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES FOUR DAYS INTO A SIX WEEK TRIAL

October 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Hosking & Anor v Apax Partners LLP & Ors [2018] EWHC 2732 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard awarded indemnity costs in a case where the claimant discontinued four days into a six week trial. “My assessment is that this was high-risk…

WHEN YOU SETTLE THE APPLICATION BUT LEAVE IT TO THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE OF COSTS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

WHEN YOU SETTLE THE APPLICATION BUT LEAVE IT TO THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE OF COSTS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

October 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Conversant Wireless Licensing SARL v Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2549 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr had to consider the appropriate order to make when the parties had agreed the terms of an application but could not…

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VIII: PROPORTIONALITY LEADS TO BASE COSTS BEING REDUCED FROM £115,906.00 TO £75,000

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VIII: PROPORTIONALITY LEADS TO BASE COSTS BEING REDUCED FROM £115,906.00 TO £75,000

October 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

I am grateful to my colleague Robin Dunne for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Auerbach in Reynolds -v- One Stop Limited (21st September 2018). A copy of the judgment is available A79YM916 Reynolds v One Stop…

SOLICITORS CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO HAND OVER FILES: HIGH COURT DECISION

SOLICITORS CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO HAND OVER FILES: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Hanley v J C & A Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2592 (QB) Mr Justice Soole decided that the court did not have inherent power to compel solicitors to hand over copies of documents to their former clients. THE CASE Three claimants…

ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: RELEVANT FACTORS INCLUDE CLAIMANT'S OFFER OF SETTLEMENT

ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: RELEVANT FACTORS INCLUDE CLAIMANT’S OFFER OF SETTLEMENT

October 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The judgment in Welsh v Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust (Costs) [2018] EWHC 2491 (QB) is one of those “cut out and keep” judgments in that it contains a useful precis of all the relevant rules and principles relating to issue based…

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VII: FAILURE TO FOCUS ON THE SIMPLE ISSUE LED TO DISPROPORTIONATE COSTS

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VII: FAILURE TO FOCUS ON THE SIMPLE ISSUE LED TO DISPROPORTIONATE COSTS

October 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

It can be said that the clue here is in the name of the case  – London Borough of Hounslow v A Father & Mother (Costs in the Court of Protection – Disproportionate litigation) [2018] EWCOP 23.  This is a…

COST LAWYERS - SHOW THEM SOME RESPECT: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

COST LAWYERS – SHOW THEM SOME RESPECT: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

October 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There is a footnote to the judgment of Master Leonard yesterday in Allen v Brethertons LLP [2018] EWHC B15 (Costs) that is worth reading for anyone involved in costs litigation. “Ms Moore, when acting as a Costs Lawyer with a right…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 2 & 3 : RISKING IT ALL ON A RECOLLECTION OF A MEETING & THE WITNESS WHO GIVES A WHOLLY NEW ACCOUNT FROM THE WITNESS BOX

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 2 & 3 : RISKING IT ALL ON A RECOLLECTION OF A MEETING & THE WITNESS WHO GIVES A WHOLLY NEW ACCOUNT FROM THE WITNESS BOX

September 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Slade (t/a Richard Slade And Co) v Abbhi [2018] EWHC 2039 (Comm) (24 September 2018) illustrates another risk of litigation.  The risk of a witness giving a wholly new account whilst giving evidence at trial. THE CASE The…

BACK TO BASICS 16: COSTS BUDGETING: THE GUIDANCE NOTES ON PRECEDENT H

BACK TO BASICS 16: COSTS BUDGETING: THE GUIDANCE NOTES ON PRECEDENT H

September 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

There is much written about the process of costs budgeting.  There is much to be said, when preparing for a hearing – and often at the hearing itself, looking at the Practice Direction and Guidance Notes. THE PRACTICE DIRECTION The…

QOCS PROTECTION COVERS A COUNTER-CLAIMING DEFENDANT: SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT

QOCS PROTECTION COVERS A COUNTER-CLAIMING DEFENDANT: SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT

September 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS

I am grateful to barrister Andrew Lyons for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Freedman in Ketchion -v- McEwan (28th June 2018), a copy of which is available here, 1061737_Ketchion v McEwan_Judgment for Approval_26 6 18.  It is…

THE ELECTRONIC BILL OF COSTS: UPDATE TO LINKS, INCLUDING GUIDANCE ON THE ENTIRE PROCESS

THE ELECTRONIC BILL OF COSTS: UPDATE TO LINKS, INCLUDING GUIDANCE ON THE ENTIRE PROCESS

September 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

There has been much recent comment on the “success” (or otherwise) of the electronic bill of costs.  This is a guide time to update the links to  commentary and guidance on the process.   RECENT COMMENTARY The New Law Journal…

IF YOU WANT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER YOU NEED TO "SHOUT" OUT IN ADVANCE: "YOU NEVER GIVE ME YOUR MONEY..."

IF YOU WANT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER YOU NEED TO “SHOUT” OUT IN ADVANCE: “YOU NEVER GIVE ME YOUR MONEY…”

September 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC & Anor v WPMC Ltd & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 2005 the Court of Appeal overturned a ruling that a director of a company should pay pay a company’s costs.  The absence of warning was a…

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANTS IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER:  INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE: AN EXHAUSTING READ

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANTS IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE: AN EXHAUSTING READ

September 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Fontaine in The VW NOx Emissions Group Litigation [2018] EWHC 2308 (QB) is a warning to any litigator thinking of applying for a Group Litigation Order (“GLO”).  The rule is clear basically – get your case in…

COSTS IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION: “ARROGANCE” AND “PETULANCE” LEADS TO AN AWARD OF COSTS AGAINST A LOCAL AUTHORITY

September 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Admissions, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In London Borough of Lambeth v MCS & Anor [2018] EWCOP 20 Mr Justice Newton did not follow the normal practice in Court of Protection cases. He ordered costs to be paid against the Local Authority and the Lambeth Commissioning Group….

DISCONTINUING CLAIMANT STILL HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT'S COSTS: CLAIMANT CANNOT PASS RISKS ON TO ANOTHER DEFENDANT

DISCONTINUING CLAIMANT STILL HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT’S COSTS: CLAIMANT CANNOT PASS RISKS ON TO ANOTHER DEFENDANT

August 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In BAE Systems Pension Funds Trustees Ltd v Bowmer & Kirkland Ltd [2018] EWHC 1222 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford refused the claimant’s application for an order that it should not have to pay the costs of a defendant it discontinued against. …

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY TO MONTREAL CONVENTION CLAIMS: DECISION FROM LIVERPOOL

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY TO MONTREAL CONVENTION CLAIMS: DECISION FROM LIVERPOOL

August 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Katie Wheeler from Compass Costs  for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Baldwin (Regional Costs Judge) in McKendry -v- British Airways PLC (hearing 16th May 2018 – judgment received today, available here McKendry)….

A MONTREAL CONVENTION CLAIM DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE PORTAL: FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY

A MONTREAL CONVENTION CLAIM DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE PORTAL: FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY

August 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I am grateful to  Peter Bland from Scott Rees, solicitors,  for sending me a copy of the decision in Mead -v- British Airways Plc*.  Mead v BA template – Final 15 August 2018 (1)This considers the issue of whether a…

RESPONDENT CAN STILL RAISE ISSUES ON DAMAGES AFTER LIABILITY IS DETERMINED: IMPORTANT POINT ON PROTECTING AN APPLICANT AS TO COSTS

RESPONDENT CAN STILL RAISE ISSUES ON DAMAGES AFTER LIABILITY IS DETERMINED: IMPORTANT POINT ON PROTECTING AN APPLICANT AS TO COSTS

August 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Damages, Default judgment,, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision in Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes [2018] EWCA Civ 1842 is in relation to procedure in the Employment Tribunal.  However there are two points in the judgment that are of general importance to civil practitioners. …

FULL QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO "MIXED CLAIMS": THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL

FULL QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO “MIXED CLAIMS”: THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

In  The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Brown [2018] EWHC 2046 (Admin) Mrs Justice Whipple held that a claim against the police for misuse of data, misfeasance in public office and misuse of private information, did not give rise…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36: IT IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER JUST BECAUSE THE PARTIES SAY SO: OFFERS CAN ONLY BE ASSESSED BY REFERENCE TO THE PLEADINGS

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36: IT IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER JUST BECAUSE THE PARTIES SAY SO: OFFERS CAN ONLY BE ASSESSED BY REFERENCE TO THE PLEADINGS

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Hertel & Anor v Saunders & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1831 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that an offer made was not a valid Part 36 offer.  It was held that a Part 36 offer had to be…

CLAIMANT OBTAINS  INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER DEFENDANT'S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER: "BIMBLING" AND OTHER TALES OF MODERN LITIGATION

CLAIMANT OBTAINS INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER DEFENDANT’S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER: “BIMBLING” AND OTHER TALES OF MODERN LITIGATION

July 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

On the Leigh Day website there is a link to a judgment of H.H.J Alan Gore QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in the case of Holmes -v- West London Mental Health NHS Turst (29th June 2018).  The judge…

FIXED COSTS CONTINUE WHEN DEFENDANT ACCEPTS A PART 36 OFFER OUT OF TIME: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

FIXED COSTS CONTINUE WHEN DEFENDANT ACCEPTS A PART 36 OFFER OUT OF TIME: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe, solicitor, at Taylor Rose TTKW for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment today in Hislop -v- Perde [2018] EWCA Civ 1726. KEY POINTS The Court of Appeal held that, in…

WHEN LITIGATION LAWYERS SPLIT UP: THE FALL OUT CONTINUES: A SPLIT TRIAL WAS FAR FROM WISE...

WHEN LITIGATION LAWYERS SPLIT UP: THE FALL OUT CONTINUES: A SPLIT TRIAL WAS FAR FROM WISE…

July 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In  FPH Law (a firm) v Brown (t/a Integrum Law) [2018] EWCA Civ 1629 the Court of Appeal dismissed the defendant’s appeal against a finding on a preliminary issue. There was a potential cause of action between two firms of solicitors…

COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY:  JUST THE TICKET: JUDGE REJECTS COMPARISON WITH DEFENDANT'S BUDGET WHEN IT "JUST DOES NOT MAKE SENSE"

COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY: JUST THE TICKET: JUDGE REJECTS COMPARISON WITH DEFENDANT’S BUDGET WHEN IT “JUST DOES NOT MAKE SENSE”

July 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

The issue of costs budgeting and proportionality was considered by Mr Justice Birss in Red and White Services Ltd v Phil Anslow Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 1699 (Ch).  The judge was prepared to take a robust approach to proportionality. There…

APPEALS, QOCS AND SET OFF: MORE ON THE DECISION IN CARTWRIGHT -V- VENDUCT: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED SET OFF OF APPEAL COSTS

APPEALS, QOCS AND SET OFF: MORE ON THE DECISION IN CARTWRIGHT -V- VENDUCT: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED SET OFF OF APPEAL COSTS

July 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

I am grateful to Gary Brankin and Jeremy Rae  of BC Legal for providing more information about the decision in Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654, the court of Appeal decision on QOCS considered yesterday.  This is a point on…

TOMLIN ORDER PREVENTS "SUCCESSFUL" DEFENDANT RECOVERING COSTS FROM CLAIMANT'S DAMAGES IN A QOCS CASE: BUT CHOOSE YOUR DEFENDANTS CAREFULLY

TOMLIN ORDER PREVENTS “SUCCESSFUL” DEFENDANT RECOVERING COSTS FROM CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES IN A QOCS CASE: BUT CHOOSE YOUR DEFENDANTS CAREFULLY

July 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Risks of litigation

In Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to the recoverability of costs in multi-defendant cases where the claimant would normally have the protection of qualified one-way costs shifting.   The case provides…

SOLICITOR AND CLIENT COSTS: A PRACTICAL GUIDE - BOOK REVIEW: BUY IT AND READ IT: £30 WORTH SPENDING

SOLICITOR AND CLIENT COSTS: A PRACTICAL GUIDE – BOOK REVIEW: BUY IT AND READ IT: £30 WORTH SPENDING

July 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Book Review, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Disputes  about costs between lawyers and their (former) clients can be “challenging”. Indeed they can be vitriolic and expensive.  The lawyer thinking “We’ve done the work” – the client thinking “how much” and “I got nothing out of it, why…

PROPORTIONAL COSTS IN A FATAL CASE: THE MATTERS THAT CAN  RECOVERED

PROPORTIONAL COSTS IN A FATAL CASE: THE MATTERS THAT CAN RECOVERED

July 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Proportionality

The facts in Powell & Ors v The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police [2018] EWHC B12 (Costs) are quite extraordinary.  This judgment, on the issue of costs, adds to the material relating to proportionality.  Equally important is the fact that…

COSTS: PHONE HACKING AND REPUTATION: PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE SUMS AT STAKE

COSTS: PHONE HACKING AND REPUTATION: PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE SUMS AT STAKE

July 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Various Claimants (In Wave 1 of the Mirror Newspapers Hacking Litigation) v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC B13 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker addressed the elements of “proportionality”. “The rule does not prevent the recovery of costs in an amount greater than the…

COSTS & PROPORTIONALITY: ITS NOT ALL ABOUT THE MONEY: DEFENDANT'S COSTS WERE NOT DISPROPORTIONAL

COSTS & PROPORTIONALITY: ITS NOT ALL ABOUT THE MONEY: DEFENDANT’S COSTS WERE NOT DISPROPORTIONAL

July 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

Proportionality was the central issue in the judgment of Master Leonard in  Arjomandkhah v Nasrouallahi [2018] EWHC B11 (Costs). The Master rejected the claimant’s argument that the defendant’s costs (roughly one-third of the claimant’s costs budget) was disproportional. “In contrast to…

← Previous 1 … 18 19 20 … 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

  • SERVICE POINTS 41: THE DEFENDANTS REQUIRED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION FOLLOWING INVALID SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A POINT FOR PRACTITIONERS TO WATCH…
  • SERVICE POINTS 40: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT VALID NEITHER WAS SERVICE AT THE “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS”: THE CLAIMANT HAD TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE AS TO HIS STATE OF KNOWLEDGE
  • THE DEFENDANT’S ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER FROM THE CLAIMANT DID NOT PREVENT A SECOND ACTION IN RELATION TO A DIFFERENT (BUT RELATED) ISSUE
  • COST BITES 384: THE LOSER OF AN APPLICATION USUALLY PAYS AND THERE HAS TO BE A GOOD REASON IF THEY DON’T: APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS A DECISION TO THE CONTRARY
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A USEFUL ENCAPSULATION OF THE COURT’S APPROACH TO DISPUTED WITNESS EVIDENCE: WITNESSES CAN LIE FOR VARIOUS REASONS

Top Posts

  • THE DEFENDANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER FROM THE CLAIMANT DID NOT PREVENT A SECOND ACTION IN RELATION TO A DIFFERENT (BUT RELATED) ISSUE
  • COST BITES 384: THE LOSER OF AN APPLICATION USUALLY PAYS AND THERE HAS TO BE A GOOD REASON IF THEY DON'T: APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS A DECISION TO THE CONTRARY
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A USEFUL ENCAPSULATION OF THE COURT'S APPROACH TO DISPUTED WITNESS EVIDENCE: WITNESSES CAN LIE FOR VARIOUS REASONS
  • SERVICE POINTS 40: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT VALID NEITHER WAS SERVICE AT THE "LAST KNOWN ADDRESS": THE CLAIMANT HAD TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE AS TO HIS STATE OF KNOWLEDGE
  • SERVICE POINTS 41: THE DEFENDANTS REQUIRED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION FOLLOWING INVALID SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A POINT FOR PRACTITIONERS TO WATCH...

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.