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 21

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…

HOURLY RATES AND COMPLEX CASES: MASTER MAY HAVE APPLIED THE WRONG TEST BUT CAME TO THE RIGHT RESULT

HOURLY RATES AND COMPLEX CASES: MASTER MAY HAVE APPLIED THE WRONG TEST BUT CAME TO THE RIGHT RESULT

July 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In JXA v Kettering General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 1747 (QB) Mr Justice Goss rejected an appeal in relation to hourly rates of the claimant’s solicitor in a high value clinical negligence case. THE CASE The claimant had been…

BRIEF FEE NOT TO BE ABATED BECAUSE OF VERY LATE SETTLEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

BRIEF FEE NOT TO BE ABATED BECAUSE OF VERY LATE SETTLEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

July 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In Hugh Cartwright & Amin v Devoy-Williams & Anor [2018] EWHC 1692 (QB) Mrs Justice Nicola Davies MBE (sitting with an assessor) overturned a decision of a Master where counsel’s brief fee was reduced because the matter had settled the afternoon…

CORONER ORDERED TO PAY COSTS: CAMDEN RESIDENTS WILL PICK UP THE BILL...

CORONER ORDERED TO PAY COSTS: CAMDEN RESIDENTS WILL PICK UP THE BILL…

June 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Adath Yisroel Burial Society & Anor, R (on the application of) v HM Senior Coroner for Inner North London [2018] EWHC 1286 (Admin) the Divisional Court held that a coroner, who was unsuccessful in defending an application for judicial review,…

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 9: COURT FEES, FEE REMISSION AND LIMITATION STANDSTILL AGREEMENTS

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 9: COURT FEES, FEE REMISSION AND LIMITATION STANDSTILL AGREEMENTS

June 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Court fees, Limitation, Members Content

This is the penultimate post looking back at key series of the past five years. I am  here revisiting two aspects of the law relating to court fees. Firstly the series on mitigating the effect of the (ridiculous) increase in…

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 6: PROPORTIONALITY: THE POSTS AND 12 PRACTICAL STEPS

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 6: PROPORTIONALITY: THE POSTS AND 12 PRACTICAL STEPS

June 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

The series “Proportionality & Survival for Litigators” started in December 2014.  At the outset I said it could be a long-running and difficult series – it is definitely still ongoing. It remains the case that little written is on proportionality, …

PART 36: COURT OF APPEAL SETS ASIDE ORDER THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS FROM EARLIER DATE FOLLOWING LATE ACCEPTANCE OF AN OFFER

PART 36: COURT OF APPEAL SETS ASIDE ORDER THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS FROM EARLIER DATE FOLLOWING LATE ACCEPTANCE OF AN OFFER

June 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In the decision today in Tuson v Murphy [2018] EWCA Civ 1461 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order that a claimant accepting a Part 36 offer late should pay costs from a much earlier date than that…

THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: LIABILITY FOR COSTS LAWYER'S ACTS: THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GEMPRIDE -v- BAMRAH

THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: LIABILITY FOR COSTS LAWYER’S ACTS: THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GEMPRIDE -v- BAMRAH

June 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

Yesterday I gave a short summary of the decision in Gempride Ltd v Bamrah & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1367. This is a case worth looking at in detail.   The substantive case settled for £50,000 shortly after issue. The question of…

CFA IS STILL VALID EVEN IF IT NAMES THE WRONG DEFENDANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

CFA IS STILL VALID EVEN IF IT NAMES THE WRONG DEFENDANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

June 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In  Malone v Birmingham Community NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 1376 the Court of Appeal held that a Conditional Fee Agreement was valid even though it named the wrong defendant.  The judgment contains important observations on how conditional fee agreements should…

ORDER FOR COSTS TO BE ASSESSED DOES NOT OUST FIXED COSTS: CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

ORDER FOR COSTS TO BE ASSESSED DOES NOT OUST FIXED COSTS: CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

June 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe of Taylor-Rose  for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Yelton in Bratek -v-Clark-Drain Limited (County Court at Cambridge 30th April 2018). A copy is available here Bratek v Clark-Drain Ltd…

AVOIDING THE TERMS OF A CONSENT ORDER: A CASE THAT HAS A LOT OF LESSONS FOR SOLICITORS: WHY A CONSENT ORDER MAY NOT BE WORTH THE PAPER ITS WRITTEN ON

AVOIDING THE TERMS OF A CONSENT ORDER: A CASE THAT HAS A LOT OF LESSONS FOR SOLICITORS: WHY A CONSENT ORDER MAY NOT BE WORTH THE PAPER ITS WRITTEN ON

June 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment in  Riordan & Ors v Moon Beevor Solicitors (a firm) [2018] EWHC 1452 (QB) gives an interesting insight into the fallout from litigation – where the disgruntled client blames the solicitors.   There are important lessons here about the drafting…

JUDGES CANNOT MAGICALLY ACQUIRE INFORMATION BY OSMOSIS:  THE DUTY ON PARTIES TO ENCAPSULATE LONG-RUNNING LITIGATION

JUDGES CANNOT MAGICALLY ACQUIRE INFORMATION BY OSMOSIS: THE DUTY ON PARTIES TO ENCAPSULATE LONG-RUNNING LITIGATION

June 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content

In SC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Anor [2018] EWHC 1368 (Comm) Patrica Robertson QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) reminded practitioners that judges have no magical powers. When a long-running case on a “grand scale” comes before the court…

DEFENDANT NOT ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY COSTS IF PART 36 OFFER NOT BEATEN: SUCCESS ON COSTS APPEAL HAS MINUSCULE IMPACT ON OVERALL COSTS OF APPEAL

June 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Shalaby v London North West Healthcare NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 1323 the Court of Appeal upheld the principle that a defendant is not entitled to indemnity costs simply because a claimant has not beaten a Part 36 offer.  It…

STAGE 3 ISSUE FEES:  COURT REPAYS OVERPAID FEES: GOOD NEWS FROM LIVERPOOL

STAGE 3 ISSUE FEES: COURT REPAYS OVERPAID FEES: GOOD NEWS FROM LIVERPOOL

June 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

In January this year I blogged about correspondence I had received from Jon Heath, a solicitor at Levins, in Liverpool about the courts overcharging on Stage 3 issue fees. Yesterday I received an email from Jon telling me that the…

COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: "THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE"

COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: “THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE”

May 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Sirketi v Kupeli & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 1264 the Court of Appeal overturned an order for costs in favour of the claimants with an order for no costs. It was, as Lord Justice Hickinbottom observed “a melancholy tale”.  The…

QOCS: WHAT IS A CLAIM FOR "DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES"?  JUDGMENT HERE - APPEAL PENDING

QOCS: WHAT IS A CLAIM FOR “DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES”? JUDGMENT HERE – APPEAL PENDING

May 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS

NB THIS JUDGMENT WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL.  SEE THE POST HERE. I am grateful to barrister Claire Darwin for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Luba in Brown -v- The Commissioner of Police for the…

60% OFF AT MORRISONS: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANTS ONLY RECOVER 40% OF THEIR COSTS: HIGH COURT DECISION

60% OFF AT MORRISONS: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANTS ONLY RECOVER 40% OF THEIR COSTS: HIGH COURT DECISION

May 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Various Claimants v WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc [2018] EWHC 1123 Mr Justice Langstaff held that the claimants’ conduct of the claim led to unnecessary costs being incurred. Consequentially the defendant was ordered to pay the claimants 40% of the…

REDUCTION IN VALUE OF CLAIM AND REDUCTION IN HOURLY RATES DID NOT REPRESENT A GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE BUDGET

April 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Jallow v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC B7 (Costs) Master Rowley rejected an argument that  the settlement of a claim for a sum less than that claimed and a  reduction in hourly rates for incurred costs represented  “good reasons”…

IDENTIFYING THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY AND MAKING A COSTS ORDER:  PARTIALLY SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT'S APPEAL ALLOWED: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY 60% OF THE COSTS.

IDENTIFYING THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY AND MAKING A COSTS ORDER: PARTIALLY SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY 60% OF THE COSTS.

April 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Wall v Munday [2018] EWHC 879 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) allowed an appeal in relation to costs.  The judge at first instance had ordered the claimant to pay 80% of the defendant’s costs. That…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 6: NON-DISCLOSURE OF A PART 36 OFFER

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 6: NON-DISCLOSURE OF A PART 36 OFFER

April 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This post is caused by some comments on Twitter this evening. A surprising number of cases where parties have, by one method or other, disclosed a Part 36 offer. This has been done by including the offers in the trial…

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -v- CHANNEL 5 3: WHY A DEFENDANT SHOULD ALWAYS FILE A COSTS BUDGET:  A REMINDER OF THE RULES

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -v- CHANNEL 5 3: WHY A DEFENDANT SHOULD ALWAYS FILE A COSTS BUDGET: A REMINDER OF THE RULES

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The final part of this trilogy on the judgment today in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) shows why the defendant will be kicking themselves for not filing a costs budget.   Some defendants are fairly…

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2:  CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2: CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This is the second post about the decision on costs in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch). Here we look at the issue relating to Part 36.  The defendant had made a Part 36 offer….

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 1: THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO MEDIATE

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 1: THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO MEDIATE

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

The judgment on costs issues  today in  Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) covers a number of issues. I am dealing with each distinct issue in a separate post. The first deals with costs following…

THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

Judgments dealing with payments on account of costs are rare, but illuminating.  Particularly when the costs budget is taken as the starting point. There is a detailed consideration of this issue in Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018]…

LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS

LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of the Supreme Court this morning in Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Company Ltd [2018] UKSC 21. It confirms that solicitors are entitled to costs in cases where the defendant’s insurer, knowing of the solicitor’s involvement,  settled…

MAKING UNWARRANTED ASSERTIONS LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS – AGAINST A SECRETARY OF STATE

April 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are numerous cases where the courts have considered conduct that leads to indemnity costs. In Secretary of State for the Home Department v Barry [2018] EWCA Civ 790 the Court of Appeal found that the Home Department’s conduct of an…

THE NEW ELECTRONIC BILL OF COSTS: ONE DAY TO GO: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

THE NEW ELECTRONIC BILL OF COSTS: ONE DAY TO GO: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

April 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Rule Changes, Useful links

The electronic bill of costs will be compulsory from the 6th April. Here are some useful links to help you prepare and survive.  I will add to these if anyone has any particular recommendations.   PRACTICE DIRECTIONS The Practice Direction…

CLAIMANTS COSTS REDUCED BECAUSE OF FAILURE ON CERTAIN POINTS: 15% AND 50% REDUCTION

CLAIMANTS COSTS REDUCED BECAUSE OF FAILURE ON CERTAIN POINTS: 15% AND 50% REDUCTION

April 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Civilians v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 690 (QB) Mr Justice Leggatt reduced the costs of the successful party due to the fact that the claimants failed on some issues. THE CASE The claimants had been successful in an action…

WHEN THE JUDGE IS ENTITLED NOT TO DECIDE ON THE EVIDENCE:  PLUS THE IMPORTANT ISSUE OF  CONDUCT AND COSTS

WHEN THE JUDGE IS ENTITLED NOT TO DECIDE ON THE EVIDENCE: PLUS THE IMPORTANT ISSUE OF CONDUCT AND COSTS

March 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision today in Constandas v Lysandrou & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 613 illustrates two distinct issues: The position when a judge is unable to make a finding on the evidence. What conduct can lead to a successful…

THE SECRET BARRISTER  AND CIVIL LITIGATORS 2: THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF THE LITIGATION SOLICITOR

THE SECRET BARRISTER AND CIVIL LITIGATORS 2: THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF THE LITIGATION SOLICITOR

March 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Book Review, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am back to my review of the book that everyone is reading, the Secret Barrister’s “Stories of the Law and how its Broken”.  I’ve already have people ask me not to give too much away – “don’t spoil the plot”.  I…

THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP

THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP

March 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

There is a battle (or a series of skirmishes) going on at present in relation to solicitors charging success fees to their clients in personal injury cases. This has led to numerous applications to the courts for disclosure.  The former…

ROUND ONE: WHAT IS A"WIN" UNDER A CFA?  ROUND TWO: THE ASSIGNMENT OF CFAS: FORMER CLIENT DOES NOT SCORE A KNOCKOUT BLOW

ROUND ONE: WHAT IS A”WIN” UNDER A CFA? ROUND TWO: THE ASSIGNMENT OF CFAS: FORMER CLIENT DOES NOT SCORE A KNOCKOUT BLOW

March 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC B6 (Costs) Master Leonard considered what was meant by the term “win” in a conditional fee agreement.  He also considered whether a CFA was properly assigned.  The former client (the claimant in this…

CHANGING FROM LEGAL AID TO A CFA: JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: DEFENDANTS' APPEAL ALLOWED: ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES NOT RECOVERABLE

CHANGING FROM LEGAL AID TO A CFA: JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: DEFENDANTS’ APPEAL ALLOWED: ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES NOT RECOVERABLE

March 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Sean Linley of PIC costings for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgement in Surrey -v- Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 451.  This is the latest in the…

LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE CLAIMANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE CLAIMANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

March 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In the judgment today in Springer v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 436 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that refused to give relief from sanctions following late service of notice of funding.  The case shows…

← Previous 1 … 20 21 22 … 31 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 67: LITIGANTS NOT ALLOWED TO RECOVER THE COSTS OF AN EXPERT WHOSE EVIDENCE ON SOME ISSUES WAS “LARGELY UNHELPFUL”
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: YOU CANNOT NECESSARILY RELY ON INTERLOCUTORY WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL
  • MEMBER NEWS: A REMINDER THAT YOU CAN SET THE FREQUENCY THAT YOU RECEIVE UPDATES
  • COST BITES 442: AN IMPORTANT POINT TO WATCH WHEN SEEKING TO RECOVER COSTS ON A COUNTERCLAIM
  • COST BITES 441: NO ORDER FOR COSTS – EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT WAS SUCCESSFUL: THERE ARE MANY LESSONS TO LEARN HERE…

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY "WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT" TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS
ANOTHER INTERESTING DISCUSSION (ABOUT INTEREST...): THE STARTING POINT IS THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR BEING OUT OF ITS MONEY (NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE DONE WITH IT...)
COST BITES 441: NO ORDER FOR COSTS - EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT WAS SUCCESSFUL: THERE ARE MANY LESSONS TO LEARN HERE...
THROWBACK FRIDAY: AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION AN 8 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE (AUGUST 2019): AND LOOK AT THE LINKS...

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.