Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Funding
COST BITES 290: BARRISTERS TAKE CARE: ANOTHER REASON THE DBAS WERE INVALID - FAILURE TO INCLUDE COUNSEL'S FEES IN THE EQUATION...

COST BITES 290: BARRISTERS TAKE CARE: ANOTHER REASON THE DBAS WERE INVALID – FAILURE TO INCLUDE COUNSEL’S FEES IN THE EQUATION…

September 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing with our consideration of  Damages-Based Agreements that were found to be unlawful.  This time the judge considered the position in relation to counsel’s fees and the Regulations.  The judge held that the attempt to charge counsel’s fees…

COST BITES 289: INVALID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS MEANT THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD NOT RECOVER £1.3 MILLION IN COSTS (A BAD DAY OUT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED...)

COST BITES 289: INVALID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS MEANT THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD NOT RECOVER £1.3 MILLION IN COSTS (A BAD DAY OUT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED…)

September 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Success Fees

Today we are looking at a case where the appellants claim to £1.3 million in costs was lost because the Damages-Based Agreements were found to be unlawful and unenforceable.  It provides a salutary lesson to all those who are involved…

COST BITES 275: APPELLANT SUCCESSFUL IN PUTTING LOCAL AUTHORITY RECEIVING PARTIES TO THEIR ELECTION IN RELATION TO CCFAS

COST BITES 275: APPELLANT SUCCESSFUL IN PUTTING LOCAL AUTHORITY RECEIVING PARTIES TO THEIR ELECTION IN RELATION TO CCFAS

August 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

It may be a matter of comment when the suspicion arises that the costs of arguing about costs exceeds the initial costs in dispute.  I suspect that may be the case in many cases in this series (indeed people have…

SOLICITOR CANNOT TAKE OVER CLIENT'S CAUSE OF ACTION: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS ISSUES RELATING TO CHAMPERTY

SOLICITOR CANNOT TAKE OVER CLIENT’S CAUSE OF ACTION: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS ISSUES RELATING TO CHAMPERTY

March 14, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In  Farrar & Anor v Miller [2022] EWCA Civ 295 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that a firm of solicitors could not continue an action that had been assigned to them by their client.   “a champertous agreement…

SOLICITORS AND FUNDERS ENTITLED TO TERMINATE THEIR AGREEMENT: FORMER CLIENTS LIABLE TO PAY COSTS: WHEN LITIGATION GOES AWRY

SOLICITORS AND FUNDERS ENTITLED TO TERMINATE THEIR AGREEMENT: FORMER CLIENTS LIABLE TO PAY COSTS: WHEN LITIGATION GOES AWRY

August 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conditional Fee Agreements, Members Content, Professional negligence,

The judgment of HHJ Cadwallader in Escalate Law Ltd & Anor v Kennedy & Anor [2021] EWHC 2232 (Ch) is an example of legal funders and solicitors falling out with their clients.  The  judge upheld the decision to withdraw from…

NO PUBLIC FUNDING FOR PARENTS WHEN THE LIFE OF THEIR CHILD IS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE COURT: A DECISION THAT HIGHLIGHTS A MAJOR ISSUE

March 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Members Content

There judgment in the  heartbreaking case of  The NHS Trust v The Parents & S [2021] EWHC 594 (Fam) raises many issues. Here I want to highlight  one aspect of legal funding , (along with pointing to the magnificent steps…

IF THE CAP DON'T FIT A JUDGE DOESN'T HAVE TO ACQUIT: THE ARKIN CAP IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

IF THE CAP DON’T FIT A JUDGE DOESN’T HAVE TO ACQUIT: THE ARKIN CAP IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Chapelgate Credit Opportunity Master Fund Ltd v Money & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 24 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to apply the “Arkin cap” to a party that had been funding litigation. …

COURT OF APPEAL TO CONSIDER IMPACT OF TRANSFERRING CASE FROM LEGAL AID TO CFA:

COURT OF APPEAL TO CONSIDER IMPACT OF TRANSFERRING CASE FROM LEGAL AID TO CFA:

September 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Tom Jenkinson from Bolt Burdon Kemp for letting me know that the Court of Appeal has granted permission to appeal in the case of  XDE v North Middlesex University Hospital Trust [2019] EWHC 1482 (QB) XDE…

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…

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Radford & Anor v Frade & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 119 the Court of Appeal upheld the early decisions that lawyers, who worked outside the terms of their retainer under a CFA, could not recover costs from the unsuccessful party….

WHEN A PARTY CHANGES ITS FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS PART WAY THROUGH: A CHANGE FROM DBA TO CFA DID NOT PREVENT THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING FULL COSTS

WHEN A PARTY CHANGES ITS FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS PART WAY THROUGH: A CHANGE FROM DBA TO CFA DID NOT PREVENT THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING FULL COSTS

January 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The decision of Master James in Dial Partners LLP & Anor v Eastern Airways International Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC B1 (Costs) raises an interesting set of issues when a party changes the basis of its funding part-way through a case,…

"YOU ARE ONLY HERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A CFA": THERE IS NOT MUCH USE IN ATTACKING THE SOURCE OF YOUR OPPONENT'S FUNDING

“YOU ARE ONLY HERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A CFA”: THERE IS NOT MUCH USE IN ATTACKING THE SOURCE OF YOUR OPPONENT’S FUNDING

October 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In an earlier post we looked the judge’s views in relation to witness credibility in Riva Properties Ltd & Ors v Foster + Partners Ltd [2017] EWHC 2574 (TCC). Here we look at the judge’s view on the defendant’s attack on the…

COSTS ORDERS AGAINST NON-PARTIES: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

COSTS ORDERS AGAINST NON-PARTIES: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

September 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

In Montpelier Business Reorganisation Ltd v Jones & Ors [2017] EWHC 2273 (QB) His Honour Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the issue of costs against non-parties.  The principles relating to non-party order were considered and…

CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERED: THE DEFENDANT WAS CRYING WOLF

CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERED: THE DEFENDANT WAS CRYING WOLF

September 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Case Management, Members Content

In Casehub Ltd v Wolf Cola Ltd [2017] EWHC 1169 (Ch) Stuart Isaacs QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) rejected an argument that a claimant bringing  assigned claims amounted to champerty or maintenance. It is rare for these issues…

RECOVERING LITIGATION FUNDING COSTS: A HIGH COURT CASE -BUT ABOUT ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

October 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Arbitration,, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Professor Dominic Regan and Nicholas Bacon QC for sending me a copy of the decision in Essar Oilfields -v- Norscot [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm).A decision of His Honour Judge Waksman QC sitting as a Judge of…

CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AND FUNDING: THE OUTCOME OF A LONG STRUGGLE

June 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I have received an email informing me that, thanks to the help received from a post on this blog  they – eventually – obtained legal aid and successfully defended committal proceedings.  Although the thanks are addressed to me it is…

REPRESENTATION IN CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDING: ANOTHER CASE

March 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Uncategorized

Shortly after the previous post about legal aid in committal proceedings the decision in Watson -v- Holman [2016] EW Misc B5 was placed on Bailli. The case involved committal applications for failure to comply with an order to remove a…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO ALLOW APPEAL WHERE RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURE TO GIVE TIMEOUS NOTICE OF FUNDING

October 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In its judgment today in  Mischon De Reya -v- Caliendo [2015] EWCA Civ 1029 the Court of Appeal refused the Defendant’s appeal where a claimant had been granted relief from sanctions following a failure to give proper notice of funding….

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

Relief from sanctions following late service of the notice of funding was granted by Mr Justice Simon in Jackson -v- Thompson Solicitors (& others) [2015] EWHC 549 (QB). THE CASE The claimant had failed in an action against multiple defendants…

IF YOU ENTER INTO A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT WITH YOUR CLIENT ARE YOU PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE?

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Campbell in Addleshaw Goddard LLP  -v- Wood & Hellard [2015] EWHC B12 (Costs) has some interesting observations on contentious business agreements and the nature of litigation financing generally. THE CASE The claimant solicitors had entered into…

SUCCESS FEES : DEFECTIVE NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A WHOLE BUNDLE OF ISSUES

June 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision of Mr Justice Edis in O’Brien -v- Shorrock & the MIB [2015] EWHC 1630 (QB) deals with a number of important issues in relation to costs, notice of funding, the backdating of conditional fee agreements  and relief from sanctions. THE…

CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE COUNTY COURT: THE RISK OF INJUSTICE RUNNING RIFE

May 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Committal proceedings in the civil courts are a serious business. Respondents can, and often do, go to prison. The legal costs incurred by the applicant are often extremely high. However those responding have real and fundamental difficulties in obtaining representation….

INTEREST ON COSTS; PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS & INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST FUNDERS: EXCALIBUR IN THE REPORTS AGAIN

March 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked at the Excalibur case before in the context of an order for indemnity costs against funders. Further decisions in relation to costs were made by Christopher Clarke L.J. in Excalibur Ventures LLC -v- Texas Keystone INC [2015]…

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 35.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A DECISION OF PROFOUND PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE TO SOLICITORS: WHEN IS SOMEONE EMPLOYED BY A SOLICITOR ENTITLED TO “CONDUCT” LITIGATION? A HIGH COURT DECISION THAT WILL HAVE WIDESPREAD RAMIFICATIONS
  • COST BITES 290: BARRISTERS TAKE CARE: ANOTHER REASON THE DBAS WERE INVALID – FAILURE TO INCLUDE COUNSEL’S FEES IN THE EQUATION…
  • COST BITES 289: INVALID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS MEANT THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD NOT RECOVER £1.3 MILLION IN COSTS (A BAD DAY OUT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED…)
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 2: TRANSFER OF HOUSE TO CIVIL PARTNER SET ASIDE: ARE ATTEMPTS TO AVOID PAYMENT WORTH THE CANDLE?
  • COST BITES 288: IS IT REALLY GOING TO COST £39,967.50 TO HOLD A MEETING BETWEEN LAWYERS? (AND THERE WILL BE TEN OF THEM…)

Top Posts

  • A DECISION OF PROFOUND PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE TO SOLICITORS: WHEN IS SOMEONE EMPLOYED BY A SOLICITOR ENTITLED TO "CONDUCT" LITIGATION? A HIGH COURT DECISION THAT WILL HAVE WIDESPREAD RAMIFICATIONS
  • BARRISTER REFERRED TO THE BSB BECAUSE OF THE USE OF AI "HALLUCINATED" CASES: IGNORANCE THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING IS NO DEFENCE
  • IT WOULD BE AN "AFFRONT TO JUSTICE" NOT TO SET ASIDE THIS "FINAL" JUDGMENT: THERE IS A LOT HERE THAT EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE LITIGATION PROCESS SHOULD PROBABLY READ
  • COST BITES 289: INVALID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS MEANT THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD NOT RECOVER £1.3 MILLION IN COSTS (A BAD DAY OUT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED...)
  • SOCIAL MEDIA AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: ITS USE IN A TRIAL ABOUT... SCAFFOLDING

Archives

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • 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 National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025. 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 © 2025 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.