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 5
COSTS AND OTHER CONSEQUENCES CONSIDERED WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: CIRCUIT COMMERCIAL COURT DECISION: HOW IS THE ADDITIONAL LIABILITY CALCULATED WHEN THE JUDGMENT IS NOT IN STERLING?

COSTS AND OTHER CONSEQUENCES CONSIDERED WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: CIRCUIT COMMERCIAL COURT DECISION: HOW IS THE ADDITIONAL LIABILITY CALCULATED WHEN THE JUDGMENT IS NOT IN STERLING?

June 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Summary assessment,

We are looking at a case where the claimant beat its own Part 36 offer and the court had to consider the consequences. There were some unusual aspects in that the judgment was not given in sterling.  However the judge…

COST BITES 244: WHEN ARE INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE? SHOULD THE FEES OF JUNIOR COUNSEL BE RECOVERED IN FULL? A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT  IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT CONSIDERED

COST BITES 244: WHEN ARE INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE? SHOULD THE FEES OF JUNIOR COUNSEL BE RECOVERED IN FULL? A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT CONSIDERED

June 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I periodically remind people (and remind myself) that one of the purposes of this series is to look at what is happening “on the ground” in relation to costs, including the summary assessment of costs.  Practitioners may only have limited…

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED AGAINST SOME (BUT NOT ALL) CLAIMANTS: A NUANCED HIGH COURT DECISION

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED AGAINST SOME (BUT NOT ALL) CLAIMANTS: A NUANCED HIGH COURT DECISION

June 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are returning to the same case as the previous post but looking at a different issue.  The judge considered whether to make an order for indemnity costs against the claimants.  The case is unusual in that such an award…

WHEN QOCS DOES NOT APPLY TO THE WHOLE OF A CLAIM: WHAT PERECENTAGE SHOULD THE CLAIMANTS PAY: THE MATTER CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

WHEN QOCS DOES NOT APPLY TO THE WHOLE OF A CLAIM: WHAT PERECENTAGE SHOULD THE CLAIMANTS PAY: THE MATTER CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

June 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

For the second time today we are looking at the rules relating to Qualified one way costs shifting (QOCS) and its exceptions.  Here the defendant had spent £2 million successfully defending a claim, only part of that action was a…

THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON THE LIABILITY OF CREDIT HIRE COMPANIES TO PAY COSTS: THE SPECIFIC CASES EXAMINED

THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON THE LIABILITY OF CREDIT HIRE COMPANIES TO PAY COSTS: THE SPECIFIC CASES EXAMINED

June 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

This is the second post about the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to the liability of credit hire companies to pay costs. Here we look at the decisions made in relation to each of the two cases under…

WILL A COSTS ORDER NORMALLY BE MADE AGAINST A CREDIT HIRE COMPANY? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING

WILL A COSTS ORDER NORMALLY BE MADE AGAINST A CREDIT HIRE COMPANY? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING

June 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

This is the first of several points that will look in detail at the Court of Appeal decision today in relation to the liability of credit hire companies to pay costs.  This first post outlines the main findings.  Later posts…

HOW FAR IS A SOLICITOR'S ESTIMATE OF COSTS BINDING? THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED: A HIGH COURT APPEAL

HOW FAR IS A SOLICITOR’S ESTIMATE OF COSTS BINDING? THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED: A HIGH COURT APPEAL

June 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

Many, if not all, litigators will be familiar with the scenario whereby an estimate of costs is given and events develop so that the estimate is overtaken.  This scenario was considered in the case we are considering today.   An estimate…

COST BITES 243: EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL DID NOT ERR WHEN IT ORDERED THE APPLICANT TO PAY (UP TO) £210,000 IN COSTS

COST BITES 243: EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL DID NOT ERR WHEN IT ORDERED THE APPLICANT TO PAY (UP TO) £210,000 IN COSTS

June 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

It is important for all litigators and litigants to know that some regimes, although normally costs free, do have a discretion to award costs.  The Employment Tribunal is an example of this.   In this case the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld…

COST BITES 242: THE WORDING OF THE RETAINER DID NOT ENABLE THE SOLICITOR TO RENDER INTERIM STATUTE BILLS: THE BILLS HAD INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN ANY EVENT

COST BITES 242: THE WORDING OF THE RETAINER DID NOT ENABLE THE SOLICITOR TO RENDER INTERIM STATUTE BILLS: THE BILLS HAD INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN ANY EVENT

June 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for sending me a copy of the decision we are looking at today.  Another case on the ongoing saga of whether a retainer allows a solicitor to serve interim statute bills.   The…

CLAIMANT FAILS TO BEAT DEFENDANT'S PART 36 OFFER "BY A WHISKER": IS IT UNJUST FOR THE USUAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY?

CLAIMANT FAILS TO BEAT DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER “BY A WHISKER”: IS IT UNJUST FOR THE USUAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY?

May 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we are considering a High Court decision about the consequences of a Part 36 offer.   The claimant failed to beat the offer “by a whisker” because of the way in which interest was calculated.  The judge considered the claimant’s…

YOU SPENT £1.2 MILLION ON EXPERTS AND IT WAS MAINLY MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN: DEFENDANTS ALLOWED TO RECOVER 20% OF FEES INCURRED

YOU SPENT £1.2 MILLION ON EXPERTS AND IT WAS MAINLY MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN: DEFENDANTS ALLOWED TO RECOVER 20% OF FEES INCURRED

May 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Sometimes you have to go looking for a pun as a headline for a blog post. Often they simply write themselves. In a case involving water companies who spent £1.2 million on experts,  this was one of these cases.  The…

COST BITES 241: LEGAL OMBUDSMAN'S DECISION IN RELATION TO FAILURE TO INFORM THE CLIENT ABOUT COSTS WAS NOT IRRATIONAL: SOLICITOR PAYS £35,000

COST BITES 241: LEGAL OMBUDSMAN’S DECISION IN RELATION TO FAILURE TO INFORM THE CLIENT ABOUT COSTS WAS NOT IRRATIONAL: SOLICITOR PAYS £35,000

May 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

The lawyer’s duty to keep the client fully informed of the costs being incurred is an important one.  This duty is highlighted in the case we are considering today. The Administrative Court upheld a finding of the Legal Ombudsman that…

COST BITES 239: HOW MUCH NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED TO A CLIENT ENTERING INTO A CFA?

COST BITES 239: HOW MUCH NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED TO A CLIENT ENTERING INTO A CFA?

May 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

We will, for the next few posts in this series, be working our way through one case. We have already looked at the judge’s observations in relation to the claimants’ witness statements.  We now consider the issue of how much…

COST BITES 238: WHEN A CLIENT DISPUTES THE SOLICITOR'S COSTS: THE JUDGE'S VIEW ON MEMORY, WITNESSES AND STATEMENTS DRAFTED "WITH THE GUIDING HAND OF THE CLAIMANTS' SOLICITOR"

COST BITES 238: WHEN A CLIENT DISPUTES THE SOLICITOR’S COSTS: THE JUDGE’S VIEW ON MEMORY, WITNESSES AND STATEMENTS DRAFTED “WITH THE GUIDING HAND OF THE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITOR”

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

Today we are looking at part of a judgment about costs.  Ten claimants had been selected (out of 223) to give evidence challenging a solicitor’s deduction of success fees. In fact only four of the claimants attended court to give…

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT'S COSTS : A "CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT" TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS : A “CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT” TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

May 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is a well known principle that a third party funder can be liable to pay the costs of an action.  However what happens when the funding agreement is dressed up as something else – a car sale for instance? …

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)

May 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at another aspect of the case we looked at yesterday.  Most of the attention in that case relates to the fake cases that the claimant relied upon.  However there was criticism of the defendant too.  The…

COST BITES 237: "THROUGHOUT HISTORY, LAWYERS HAVE HAD A BAD REPUTATION": COMMONSENSE AND PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED IN THE FAMILY COURTS

COST BITES 237: “THROUGHOUT HISTORY, LAWYERS HAVE HAD A BAD REPUTATION”: COMMONSENSE AND PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED IN THE FAMILY COURTS

May 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

Why spend £13,000 to recover a remedy that will only be worth £1,500? That is the issue considered by Deputy District Judge Hodgson [Professor David Hodson OBE KC (Hons)].  An application was made late. The gain to the applicant was…

THE ROLE OF LEADING COUNSEL IN RELATION TO EXPERT REPORTS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: A CLIENT CAN PAY FOR WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THESE COSTS WILL NOT BE RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES

THE ROLE OF LEADING COUNSEL IN RELATION TO EXPERT REPORTS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: A CLIENT CAN PAY FOR WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THESE COSTS WILL NOT BE RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES

May 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

How far should leading counsel, or counsel generally, be involved in the preparation of expert reports and witness statements?   One obvious reply is “not at all”, given that the evidence should come from the expert or witness.  These issues were…

COST BITES 236 : COSTS BUDGETING CAN BE RETROSPECTIVE : BUDGET CONSIDERED FROM THE DATE OF THE CCMC NOT 11 MONTHS LATER

COST BITES 236 : COSTS BUDGETING CAN BE RETROSPECTIVE : BUDGET CONSIDERED FROM THE DATE OF THE CCMC NOT 11 MONTHS LATER

May 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Can the court ever set a costs budget retrospectively?  In this case the judge held that it could, further there were good reasons for doing so in this case.   “I do not accept that the Court is unable to…

COST BITES 235: HOW IMPORTANT ARE ESTIMATES WHEN DETERMINING SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS?

COST BITES 235: HOW IMPORTANT ARE ESTIMATES WHEN DETERMINING SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS?

May 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

Most clients will want to know how much legal work is going to cost them.  Most lawyers provide an estimate.  The question in this case is how significant is that original estimate in a subsequent solicitor and own client assessment? …

COST BITES 234: A REMINDER THAT A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT CAN SOMETIMES BE AN EXPENSIVE PROCESS FOR A CLAIMANT

COST BITES 234: A REMINDER THAT A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT CAN SOMETIMES BE AN EXPENSIVE PROCESS FOR A CLAIMANT

April 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

A central aim of this series is to look at what actually happens when costs are assessed.  We see an example in the case we are looking at here.  It was the claimant’s application for a Solicitors Act assessment of  bills…

COST BITES 233: VARDY -v- ROONEY: SOME EXTRA TIME ON THE COSTS ISSUES: CLAIMANT'S CONDUCT DID NOT CROSS THE LINE -NO REDUCTION OF COSTS OF APPEAL

COST BITES 233: VARDY -v- ROONEY: SOME EXTRA TIME ON THE COSTS ISSUES: CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT DID NOT CROSS THE LINE -NO REDUCTION OF COSTS OF APPEAL

April 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

In Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 1027 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh made some further costs rulings following the dismissal of the defendant’s appeal on issues relating to costs.  Firstly he rejected the defendant’s arguments that the claimant’s costs should be…

COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A "SHORT CUT" TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY'S DAMAGES

COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A “SHORT CUT” TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY’S DAMAGES

April 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Personal Injury

A solicitor who wishes to deduct “solicitor and own client” costs in a case involving a minor or protected party requires approval by the Court.  Here we have a case where the claimant’s solicitors argued, robustly, that the current process…

COST BITES 231: THE CLAIMANT'S REASONABLE VALUATION OF THE CASE MEANT IT DID NOT COME WITHIN THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL (HOWEVER THE FACTS OF THE ACCIDENT ITSELF WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN IT OUTSIDE THE PROTOCOL)

COST BITES 231: THE CLAIMANT’S REASONABLE VALUATION OF THE CASE MEANT IT DID NOT COME WITHIN THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL (HOWEVER THE FACTS OF THE ACCIDENT ITSELF WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN IT OUTSIDE THE PROTOCOL)

April 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In Julie Johnson v Choice Support [2025] EWHC 1020 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Erwin-Jones decided that the claimant’s initial valuation of a case made it reasonable to start it outside the Pre-Action Valuation Protocol for Low Value Claims.  There is also an…

COST BITES 230:  CLIENT UNSUCCESSFUL IN APPLICATION FOR ASSESSMENT OF BILLS RENDERED MORE THAN 12 MONTHS PRIOR TO ISSUE: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS GO NOWHERE...

COST BITES 230: CLIENT UNSUCCESSFUL IN APPLICATION FOR ASSESSMENT OF BILLS RENDERED MORE THAN 12 MONTHS PRIOR TO ISSUE: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS GO NOWHERE…

April 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

There are numerous cases on this blog where solicitor defendants have encountered major problems, and often come to grief, when faced with applications by clients for solicitor and own client assessments.  The judgment of  Costs Judge Whalan in Mehta v…

COST BITES 229: THE CORRECT WAY OF CALCULATING A SUCCESS FEE IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE:  THE SOLICITOR DOES NOT HAVE AN AUTOMATIC ENTITLEMENT TO 25% OF THE DAMAGES

COST BITES 229: THE CORRECT WAY OF CALCULATING A SUCCESS FEE IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: THE SOLICITOR DOES NOT HAVE AN AUTOMATIC ENTITLEMENT TO 25% OF THE DAMAGES

April 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

The calculation of a “success fee” in a personal injury action is a subject that has been the subject of several cases over the years.  The issues were considered by District Judge Lumb in SJ (a minor suing by his mother…

COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL

COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL

April 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Franklin v Your Lawyers Ltd [2025] EWHC 984 (SCCO) Acting Senior Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a defendant solicitor’s argument that it should recover its costs after its former client had issued proceedings seeking the delivery of a statute bill. …

COST BITES 227 : THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 80% OF THE COSTS OF TWO APPLICATIONS:  DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

COST BITES 227 : THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 80% OF THE COSTS OF TWO APPLICATIONS: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

April 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to James Packer of Duncan Lewis for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mlundira -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 189 (KB), a copy of which…

CLAIMANT ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AFTER LATE ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: EVEN THOUGH FIXED COSTS APPLIED AT THE TIME THE OFFER WAS MADE

April 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN  Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 217 I am grateful to barrister Thomas Mason for drawing my attention to the judgment today in Laura Attersley v UK…

"THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK": COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN

“THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK”: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN

April 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Stephen Herbert Hunt v Oceania Capital Reserves Limited & Ors [2025] EWHC 837 (Ch) Master Brightwell refused the second and third defendants application for relief from sanctions in a case where the costs budget was served late.  However it…

VARDY -v- ROONEY: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT HAD BEEN GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT IN COSTS ASSESSMENT FAILS TO CROSS THE LINE

VARDY -v- ROONEY: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT HAD BEEN GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT IN COSTS ASSESSMENT FAILS TO CROSS THE LINE

April 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In  Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 851 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh rejected the claimant’s arguments that the defendant’s solicitors had misconducted themselves improperly and that there should consequently be a disallowance of some of the costs claimed by the…

PART 36: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANTS RECOVER ADDITIONAL SUMS: PART 36 CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE TO INCENTIVISE OFFEREES TO ACCEPT REASONABLE OFFERS

PART 36: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANTS RECOVER ADDITIONAL SUMS: PART 36 CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE TO INCENTIVISE OFFEREES TO ACCEPT REASONABLE OFFERS

April 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Thomas Barry & Anor v Denis Barry  [2025] EWHC 819 (KB) Mr Justice Dexter Dias rejected the defendant’s argument that the claimants should not receive an additional amount in circumstances where they had beaten their own Part 36 offers.  The…

PART 36 OFFER WAS VALID DESPITE THE FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE "RELEVANT PERIOD": THE HISTORY OF OFFERS IS IMPORTANT

PART 36 OFFER WAS VALID DESPITE THE FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE “RELEVANT PERIOD”: THE HISTORY OF OFFERS IS IMPORTANT

April 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Important issues relating to the construction of Part 36 were considered in detail by Mr Justice Calver in Henderson & Jones Ltd v Salica Investments Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 838 (Comm). The claimant’s failure to specify the “relevant period”…

COST BITES 226: ARE THE COSTS OF DELEGATION RECOVERABLE? POTENTIALLY - BUT THERE IS A CAVEAT - IT MUST NOT LEAD TO INCREASED COSTS

COST BITES 226: ARE THE COSTS OF DELEGATION RECOVERABLE? POTENTIALLY – BUT THERE IS A CAVEAT – IT MUST NOT LEAD TO INCREASED COSTS

April 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content

It is prudent for litigators of every type to take a look at decisions made on the assessment of costs. The fundamental questions  “am I going to get paid for doing this?” or “Is my client going to recover the…

COST BITES 225: A PEEK INSIDE THE BUDGETING PROCESS: "PROPORTIONALITY TRUMPS REASONABLENESS"

COST BITES 225: A PEEK INSIDE THE BUDGETING PROCESS: “PROPORTIONALITY TRUMPS REASONABLENESS”

April 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We get a rare chance to look inside the costs budgeting process in the judgment of Master Brightwell in  Atlantic Ways Holding SA v Freetown Terminal Holding Ltd [2025] EWHC 674 (Ch). The rationale behind each budgeting decision is set…

COST BITES 224 :  SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: COSTS JUDGE DISMISSES CLAIMANT'S PART 8 ACTION BECAUSE THERE WERE PART 7 PROCEEDINGS PENDING: (DEFENDANT'S COSTS DESCRIBED AS "INCREDIBLE)"

COST BITES 224 : SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: COSTS JUDGE DISMISSES CLAIMANT’S PART 8 ACTION BECAUSE THERE WERE PART 7 PROCEEDINGS PENDING: (DEFENDANT’S COSTS DESCRIBED AS “INCREDIBLE)”

April 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In Captivatiun Ltd v Orr Litchfield Solicitors Ltd [2025] EWHC 679 (SCCO)  Costs Judge Nagalingam dismissed a client’s application for an assessment of costs under Part 8.  The application was made out of time and there were ongoing Part 7…

CHANGE IN COURT FEES FROM 8th APRIL 2025: LINK TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION

CHANGE IN COURT FEES FROM 8th APRIL 2025: LINK TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION

March 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content

An earlier post set out the changes to court fees that are coming into force on the 8th April 2025.  The Practice Direction that brings those changes into force has now been passed.   THE PRACTICE DIRECTION The Court and…

COST BITES 223: HOW MUCH DOES AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPLICATION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE COST? £111,616 (APPROXIMATELY): (OH, AND PLUS YOUR OWN COSTS)

COST BITES 223: HOW MUCH DOES AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPLICATION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE COST? £111,616 (APPROXIMATELY): (OH, AND PLUS YOUR OWN COSTS)

March 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I sometimes have to remind people (and remind myself) that one of the aims of this series is to keep an eye on costs awards that are actually made at hearings at trial.  This provides an insight into what is…

COST BITES 222: A "RETROSPECTIVE" CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS STILL VALID AND THE PAYING PARTY HAD TO PAY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

COST BITES 222: A “RETROSPECTIVE” CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS STILL VALID AND THE PAYING PARTY HAD TO PAY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

March 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Singh & Ors v Ingram [2025] EWCA Civ 264 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a retrospective conditional fee agreement was invalid. The Court was, to say the least, suspicious of argument that the receiving party’s solicitors…

AGENCY FEES AND MEDICAL REPORTS: JUDGE REFUSES TO ALLOW AGENCY PROFIT ELEMENT OF THE FEE: ANOTHER ROUND IN A CONTINUING BATTLE

AGENCY FEES AND MEDICAL REPORTS: JUDGE REFUSES TO ALLOW AGENCY PROFIT ELEMENT OF THE FEE: ANOTHER ROUND IN A CONTINUING BATTLE

March 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to Howard Dean of Keoghs, solicitors,  for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Morris in Smith -v- Portsmouth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, a copy of which is available here.   It is a case…

COST BITES 221: A FAILURE TO AGREE TO MEDIATE DID NOT LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S COSTS

COST BITES 221: A FAILURE TO AGREE TO MEDIATE DID NOT LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS

March 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

In Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd (Re Consequential Matters) [2025] EWHC 503 (KB) Mr Justice Constable rejected the claimant’s argument that the successful defendant’s refusal to attend mediation should lead to a reduction in the defendant’s costs.  The case…

"A POINTLESS WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY": ATTEMPTS TO "REOPEN" ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT ARE HARDLY EVER FRUITFUL - AND CAN BE EXPENSIVE

“A POINTLESS WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY”: ATTEMPTS TO “REOPEN” ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT ARE HARDLY EVER FRUITFUL – AND CAN BE EXPENSIVE

March 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are a number of cases on this blog where litigants have attempted to “reopen” issues when a draft judgment is sent out to the parties for editorial corrections.  We have an example in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies…

COURT FEES ARE GOING UP SOON: MOJ PRESS RELEASE STATES FEES WILL CHANGE IN EARLY APRIL 2025

COURT FEES ARE GOING UP SOON: MOJ PRESS RELEASE STATES FEES WILL CHANGE IN EARLY APRIL 2025

March 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

A press release from the Ministry of Justice states that Court fees are to increase in early April (but there are some decreases).  The release can be found here.   “In early April 2025, and subject to parliamentary approval, the…

COST BITES 219:  DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER'S FEE? THE COURT MUST "HAVE REGARD TO THE MARKET"

COST BITES 219: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? THE COURT MUST “HAVE REGARD TO THE MARKET”

February 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In  Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau  ( The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025,available here Santiago v MIB Final)*  HHJ Dight CBE considered the issue of what was a reasonable and proportional interpreter’s fee.  The case had been…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING

February 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In A Father v A Mother [2025] EWHC 364 (Fam) Ms H Markham KC, sitting as Deputy High Court judge, made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The solicitors had failed to take steps to ensure that…

COST BITES 218: JUNIOR COUNSEL'S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE IN PRIVY COUNCIL CASE WHERE THE CFA WAS NOT LAWFUL

COST BITES 218: JUNIOR COUNSEL’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE IN PRIVY COUNCIL CASE WHERE THE CFA WAS NOT LAWFUL

February 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Andrew Roy KC  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge Rowley in Ruhumatally v The State of Mauritius & Anor, a copy of the judgment is available here  Ruhumatally – reasons.  The…

THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE

THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE

February 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content

The judgment of HHJ Halliwell, sitting as a High Court Judge, in  Bootle v GHL Property Management and Development Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 317 (Ch) provides an object lesson on the dangers of over-hasty applications for an injunction.   It…

IT WAS NOT “UNJUST” FOR THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY: THE EXISTENCE OF A MAIN CLAIM (WHICH DID NOT SUCCEED) COULD NOT ASSIST THE DEFENDANT

February 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  South Bank Hotel Management Company Ltd v Galliard Hotels Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 3544 (Ch) Mr Justice Richards considered the arguments as whether it was “unjust” for the normal provisions of a Part 36 offer to apply.  He…

COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS' COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS "ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE"

COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS “ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE”

February 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Conduct, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC), looked in the previous post.  Because of the nature of the budget that the…

COST BITES 216: THIS IS A CASE OF HIGH VALUE: HOWEVER THE CLAIMANTS' COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AND THE HOURLY RATES ARE EXCESSIVE

COST BITES 216: THIS IS A CASE OF HIGH VALUE: HOWEVER THE CLAIMANTS’ COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AND THE HOURLY RATES ARE EXCESSIVE

February 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

This is the first of two posts looking at the  costs budgeting judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC).   The judge made observations in…

← Previous 1 … 4 5 6 … 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY...)
  • ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?

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.