CHANGE IN COURT FEES FROM 8th APRIL 2025: LINK TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION
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)
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
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
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
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
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
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”
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
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
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 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
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”
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
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…
COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT – BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.
In Christodoulides v CP Christou LLP [2025] EWHC 214 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the appropriate approach were part of the Points of Dispute to a bill of costs were non-compliant. He held that the appropriate course of…
COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
In Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] EWHC 260 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith considered the arguments as to whether a major reduction in a party’s costs budget should lead to an order for costs being made, rather than an order for costs…
DENTON DID NOT APPLY TO THE DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME: HOWEVER – CONSIDERING THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE – THE APPLICATION WAS REFUSED
In Bailey & Ors v GlaxoSmithKline UK Ltd [2025] EWHC 186 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne considered whether the defendant should have an extension of time. The judge considered whether the “Denton” principles apply to the defendant’s application and if not…
COSTS BITES 214: LAWYERS DO YOU WANT TO WORK FOR NOTHING? THE DEFENDANTS’ DAMAGE BASED AGREEMENTS WERE NOT VALID AND COSTS WERE NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER A COSTS ORDER: WHY SOLICITORS NEED TO THINK ABOUT THEIR RETAINERS CAREFULLY
If ever there was a case that highlighted the need for solicitors to consider the terms of the retainer with care, and know the law relating to Damages Based Agreements in detail, it is the judgment of Costs Judge Brown…
COST BITES 213: HOW DOES THE COURT APPROACH ASSESSMENT WHEN COSTS ARE DEDUCTED FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES
We are returning, for the final post (for the time being at least) to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). The judge considered the question of how the costs should be…
COST BITES 212: ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS OF COSTS FROM CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015 AND THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT
We are again returning to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). Here we examine the claimant’s (former client’s) arguments in relation to the deduction of costs breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015…
COST BITES 211: THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: LARGE ELEMENTS OF POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE PARTICULARISATION
In St Francis Group 1 Ltd & Ors v Kelly & Anor [2025] EWHC 125 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard struck out large parts of a defendant’s Points of Dispute. The Points of Dispute were inadequately particularised. The judgment contains an…
COST BITES 210: INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTE BILLS: THE CLIENT HAS THE RIGHT TO AN ASSESSMENT OF THE FINAL BILL: “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES” CONSIDERED
I am grateful to barrister Thomas Mason for drawing my attention to the judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in Topalsson GmbH v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2025] EWHC 118 (SCCO). The judge determined that a series of…
EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT WHICH LED TO SOLICITOR’S UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM A PROTECT PARTY’S DAMAGES: JUDGMENT FROM THE SCCO
In AKS v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd [2025] EWHC 126 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard recounted an extraordinary set of facts where a solicitor had wrongly deducted sums from their client’s damages. The judgment shows that this issue…
COST BITES 209: A CLIENT’S CHALLENGE TO THE DEDUCTION OF THEIR OWN SOLICITOR’S COSTS WAS THIS A CFA OR A DBA: WAS THE SOLICITOR OBLIGED TO OFFER A DBA?
We are continuing with the examination of the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). Here the judge considered (and rejected) that claimant’s [former client’s] argument that the CFA entered into with the solicitor was…
COST BITES 208: A CLIENT’S CHALLENGE TO THE DEDUCTION OF THEIR OWN SOLICITOR’S COSTS IN PERSONAL INJURY ACTION
There is a strange area of litigation and legal costs where issues of proportionality and common sense appear to totally disappear. – that is former client’s challenges to solicitor’s deductions from damages. We see another example in Perrett v Wolferstans…
COST BITES 207: THE BREAKDOWN OF EXPERT FEES WHEN AN AGENCY IS INVOLVED (AGAIN): THE RECEIVING PARTY, APPLES AND PEARS AND AN ELECTION HAS TO BE MADE
In JXX v Archibald [2025] EWHC 69 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley considered the – much debated and litigated – issue of whether there needs to be breakdown of an expert’s fee when the expert is instructed through an agency. The…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: MAXIMISING COSTS RECOVERY ON AN INTER PARTIES RECOVER – THE LITIGATOR’S ROLE: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025
Detailed assessment usually takes place after attempts at settlement of costs have failed and there are some major differences between the parties. The webinar uses examples from reported cases to show where failures and omissions by the receiving party has…
COST BITES 206: THE COURT WOULD NOT MAKE A SUBSTANTIAL ORDER FOR COSTS WHEN AN AMENDMENT TO A REPLY ABANDONS AN ALLEGATION OF FRAUD: (ALSO THE DANGERS OF PLEADING FRAUD WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS)
In Packer v Packer [2025] EWHC 27 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered issues of costs after a claimant had amended a Reply to withdraw an allegation of fraud. The judge did not accept the…
MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES II: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND: COSTS REDUCED BY 50%
We are continuing this series looking at issues of misconduct in the assessment process by looking at the decision of District Judge Griffith in Kerins -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (Birmingham, 31st July 2015). The claimant’s costs were reduced by…
MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES 1: LAHEY -v- PIRELLI TYRES LIMITED
Recent cases on the issue of costs being reduced, or disallowed, due to the conduct of the assessment proceedings have led me to review the cases on this topic. This is the first in a series of posts about the…
THREE WEBINARS ON COSTS TO START OF THE CALENDAR (IF NOT THE FINANCIAL) YEAR
There are three webinars on costs this January of interest to most litigators. The first deals with the summary assessment of costs; the second the role of the litigator in detailed assessments and the third on the topic of deducting…
COST BITES 205: THE COURT CAN CHANGE ITS MIND AFTER MAKING AN ORDER ON THE PAPERS: THE DANGERS OF “ETERNAL GAMES OF PING PONG”
In Smith v McAlpine [2024] EWHC 3408 (KB) Senior Master Cook varied an order for costs that had been made after an application had been considered on the papers. After considering further submissions he found that his original order, that…
MAXIMISING INTER PARTES COSTS RECOVERY IN HOUSING LAW CASES: WEBINAR 10th JANUARY 2025
I am speaking about costs for housing lawyers on the 10th January 2025 in a webinar arranged by Steve Cornforth. Booking details can be found by emailing Steve on stevecornforthconsultancy@gmail.com THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at how housing…
JUDGE OVERTURNS NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANY: ANOTHER (EXPENSIVE) BATTLE IN THE “NEVER-ENDING WAR”
I am grateful to Navid Hakimmaani, Consultant Solicitor at Collins Benson Goldhill LLP, for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Mark Gargan in Smith -v- AXA Insurance UK PlC & Spectra Drive Limited (24th December 2024), a…
HAPPY NEW YEAR: THE NEW SOLICITORS’ GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES FOR 2025
January 1st sees the introduction of the indexed hourly rates. They are published on the Gov.UK website here. THE RATES FOR 2025 Grade Fee earner London 1 London 2 London 3 National 1 National 2 A Solicitors and…
COST BITES 204: A SUCCESS FEE CANNOT BE RECOVERED AS DAMAGES: SUPREME COURT DECISION: “AN ORDER THAT PROVIDES FOR ONE PARTY TO PAY ANOTHER PARTY’S COSTS IS A COSTS ORDER”
In Hirachand v Hirachand & Anor [2024] UKSC 43 the Supreme Court dismissed the idea that an award to a claimant could be increased to take account of the fact that the claimant was liable to pay a success fee…
OPENING LINES OF JUDGMENT IN 2024: GIVING THE OTHER SIDE A CHANCE TO OBJECT, NELSONIAN POLICY MAKING,HERDS OF CATTLE AND WHY THIS BLOG CAN NEVER GIVE THE LAST WORD ON SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM…
We are at the time of year when we can look back at some of the opening lines of judgments. This year it is clear that this is an international contest. THE SUPREME COURT STARTS OF THE YEAR WITH…
COST BITES 203: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT IN PRACTICE: “PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT REDUCING COSTS TO THE LOWEST POSSIBLE FIGURE”
In Ferko v Ealing Magistrates Court & Ors [2024] EWHC 3297 (Admin) Mr Justice Sweeting carried out a summary assessment. In doing so he set out some key principles in relation to the assessment of costs. In particular issues relating…
COST BITES 202: THE DIFFICULTY (IF NOT IMPOSSIBILITY) OF PROVING AN “IMPLIED RETAINER” PRIOR TO LEGAL HELP BEING OBTAINED
In Cooke & Ors v Woodchurch House Ltd (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 3318 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Bedford considered an argument that there was an “implied retainer” which permitted the claimants to recover costs prior to Legal Help being obtained. The…
CLAIMANT IS SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL, BUT DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER MEANS THAT CLAIMANT PAYS THE COSTS: A REMINDER THAT PART 36 REMAINS IMPORTANT – EVEN AT THE APPEAL STAGE
I am grateful to my colleague Steven Turner for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal decision on costs in Majid -v- HSF Logistics Polksa AP.ZO., a copy of which is available here CA Decision on Costs (and…
SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: KEEPING THE CLIENT INFORMED: AN ASSESSESSMENT WHERE THE AMOUNTS IN QUESTION WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE CLIENT
The judgment of Costs Judge Nagalingam in Underhill v Thackray Williams Solicitors [2024] EWHC 3206 (SCCO) could well serve as an object lesson in the need for a solicitor to keep their client informed of developments in costs and to…
COST BITES 201: COUNCIL NOT GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL ON “ACADEMIC” POINTS WHERE THE REAL ISSUE WAS ABOUT COSTS
In London Borough of Sutton v Betts [2024] EWCA Civ 1492 the Court of Appeal refused the defendant council’s application for permission to appeal. The claimant tenant had found accommodation and, as between the parties, the points on appeal were…
COST BITES 200: THE COURT WOULD NOT DEFER THE PAYMENT OF COSTS FOLLOWING AN INTERIM HEARING
In Brierley v Howe & Anor (Re Costs – 36 Bourne Street Ltd) [2024] EWHC 2983 ICC Judge Barber rejected a petitioner’s argument that payment of costs following an interlocutory hearing should be delayed or deferred. The judgment is a…
COST BITES 199: HIGHER LONDON RATE CAN BE USED FOR A SPECIFIC APPLICATION, EVEN IF LOWER RATES MAY APPLY LATER
The judgment of ICC Judge Barber in Brierley v Howe & Anor (Re Costs – 36 Bourne Street Ltd) [2024] EWHC 2983 (Ch) raises the interesting question as to whether the complexity of an application should lead to the solicitor’s…
DELEGATION IN LITIGATION: A CASE TO POINT – AND A WEBINAR ON THE 9th DECEMBER 2024
It is often the function, if not the duty, of someone who writes about civil procedure to look at a decision and then extract the most uninteresting aspect of the case for wider publication. I am doing this in relation…
CLAIMANT BEATS HIS OWN “NON MONETARY” OFFER: PART 36 CONSEQUENCES FOLLOW: INDEMNITY COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT
In Grierson v Grierson [2024] EWHC 3048 (Ch) Joanne Wicks KC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) found that a claimant had made a Part 36 offer which the defendant had failed to beat. The offer was…
COST BITES 198: YET ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THE BILL
Hot on the heels of publishing the previous post in relation to the judge’s refusal to order a breakdown of the agency fees involved in a medical report I received a copy of a case from Ben Millns of Kennedys. …
COST BITES 197: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: IT WAS NOT PROPORTIONAL TO ORDER A BREAKDOWN OF THE FEE
I am grateful to Brian Dempsey of BD Costs for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Iyer in the case of Craven -v- Henley, a copy of which is available here Craven -v- Henley. It is a decision…
COST BITES 196: COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: “EVERY POUND THEY SPEND FIGHTING EACH OTHER IS A POUND THAT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN”
In LI v FT (Maintenance Pending Suit: Costs) [2024] EWFC 342 Deputy District Judge Harrop made some important remarks in relation to the amount spent in bringing, and defending, an application for maintenance spending suit. “I am dismayed by what…
LIMITATION, DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS – THE KEY CASES OF 2024: WEBINAR 27th NOVEMBER 2024: HELPING YOU TO AVOID PROBLEMS IN 2O25 (AND BEYOND…)
This webinar looks at the key cases relating to limitation, default and sanctions that have occurred in 2024. The aim is to look at problem areas to help litigators avoid problems in the future. Booking details are available here. THE…
You must be logged in to post a comment.