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 » Indemnity costs
COST BITES 285: DOES THE COURT NEED TO VARY THE RECEIVING PARTY'S BUDGET WHEN IT HAS ORDERED THAT COSTS BE PAID ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS?

COST BITES 285: DOES THE COURT NEED TO VARY THE RECEIVING PARTY’S BUDGET WHEN IT HAS ORDERED THAT COSTS BE PAID ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS?

September 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are looking again at the award of indemnity costs.  The judge ordered that costs be paid  to the claimant on the indemnity basis.  He then went on to consider whether, given that decision, it was necessary to retrospectively vary…

COST BITES 284: DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS PLAY A PART IN A DECISION TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS: "DEPRIVING THE DEFENDANT OF THE USUAL RIGHT NOT TO PAY DISPROPORTIONATE COSTS, IS AN ENTIRELY PROPORTIONATE RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT OF THIS ACTION"

COST BITES 284: DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS PLAY A PART IN A DECISION TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS: “DEPRIVING THE DEFENDANT OF THE USUAL RIGHT NOT TO PAY DISPROPORTIONATE COSTS, IS AN ENTIRELY PROPORTIONATE RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT OF THIS ACTION”

September 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we look at a judgment where indemnity costs were awarded against an unsuccessful defendant.   As we shall see there were a number of factors in that decision.  However it is notable that, in both judgments, the judge commented on…

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…

MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF DISHONESTY DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY LEAD TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: BUT IT MIGHT DO: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF DISHONESTY DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY LEAD TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: BUT IT MIGHT DO: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

May 21, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to both Kevin Latham and Andrew Buchan for pointing out the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Thakkar & Ors v Mican & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 552. The court held that a judge had acted…

PART 36, WITNESS STATEMENTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND CONDUCT: READ ALL ABOUT IT

PART 36, WITNESS STATEMENTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND CONDUCT: READ ALL ABOUT IT

February 14, 2024 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Duke of Sussex & Ors v MGN Ltd (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 274 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt made some complex costs orders in relation to the litigation.  However the fundamental point was that parties that the claimants that failed…

MAKE UNJUSTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN A LETTER OF CLAIM AT YOUR PERIL - YOU CAN PAY THE COSTS: ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

MAKE UNJUSTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN A LETTER OF CLAIM AT YOUR PERIL – YOU CAN PAY THE COSTS: ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

March 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Deputy Master Nurse in Stubbins Marketing Ltd & Ors v Rayner Essex LLP & Anor [2023] EWHC 515 (Ch) contains an important lesson for anyone drafting a letter of claim. The judge ordered that the claimants pay…

COST BITES 7: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT HAS TRIED TO HAVE A SECOND BITE OF THE LITIGATION CHERRY

COST BITES 7: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT HAS TRIED TO HAVE A SECOND BITE OF THE LITIGATION CHERRY

July 18, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Tinkler v Esken Ltd (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1802 (Ch) Mr Justice Leech ordered indemnity costs against a claimant who, in essence, attempted to relitigate a case he had lost on previously.   “A principal difference between an order for…

THE RULES ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS "SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A WEAPON FOR THE PURPOSE OF BATTERING THE OPPOSITION": COMMONSENSE MUST BE USED: APPLICANT ORDERED TO PAY 75% OF THE RESPONDENTS' COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS

THE RULES ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS “SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A WEAPON FOR THE PURPOSE OF BATTERING THE OPPOSITION”: COMMONSENSE MUST BE USED: APPLICANT ORDERED TO PAY 75% OF THE RESPONDENTS’ COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS

June 17, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

In Curtiss & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1514 (TCC) HHJ Keyser QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) ordered the applicant to pay 75%  the respondents’ costs on the indemnity basis. The…

INDEMNITY COSTS IN PUBLIC LAW PROCEEDINGS: FAILURE BY THE EXECUTIVE TO COMPLY WITH CONSENT ORDER TAKES THE CASE OUT OF THE NORM

INDEMNITY COSTS IN PUBLIC LAW PROCEEDINGS: FAILURE BY THE EXECUTIVE TO COMPLY WITH CONSENT ORDER TAKES THE CASE OUT OF THE NORM

March 10, 2022 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Butt, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Indemnity costs) [2022] UKUT 69 (IAC) the Upper Tribunal found that it had power to order indemnity costs, further, on the facts of this case…

LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: COSTS REDUCED EVEN WHEN THEY WERE ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS

LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: COSTS REDUCED EVEN WHEN THEY WERE ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS

February 10, 2022 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content

There are two distinct issues arising from the judgment of HHJ Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Various Airfinance Leasing Companies & Ors v Saudi Arabian Airlines Corporation [2021] EWHC 3509 (Comm). The first relates to the…

THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL CAN AWARD COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE COMPROMISED

December 14, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In October 2020 I wrote about the case of  SRA -v- Ahmud where the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal were highly critical of the steps taken by the SRA in investigating and bringing a claim alleging dishonesty.  That case has a short coda in…

A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOW IT WORKS IN PRACTICE: THERE IS NO POINT ARGUING ISSUES OF PROPORTIONALITY WHEN INDEMNITY COSTS HAVE BEEN ORDERED

A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOW IT WORKS IN PRACTICE: THERE IS NO POINT ARGUING ISSUES OF PROPORTIONALITY WHEN INDEMNITY COSTS HAVE BEEN ORDERED

October 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

Whenever I report on an assessment of costs, for reasons that can only be guessed at, that post is always widely read.    The judgment of HHJ Davis-White QC in Goodwin v Avison & Ors [2021] EWHC 2754 (Ch) involves…

"THERE IS A WORRYING TREND... IN TERMS OF FAILURE BY EXPERTS GENERALLY IN LITIGATION COMPLYING WITH THEIR DUTIES"

“THERE IS A WORRYING TREND… IN TERMS OF FAILURE BY EXPERTS GENERALLY IN LITIGATION COMPLYING WITH THEIR DUTIES”

June 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is an important point about a litigant’s responsibility for the conduct of their own experts (and expert’s conduct generally) in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd (No. 2 Costs) [2021] EWHC 1414 (TCC). This was…

INDEMNITY COSTS DO NOT AMOUNT TO A BLANK CHEQUE: EVEN IN LARGE CASES

INDEMNITY COSTS DO NOT AMOUNT TO A BLANK CHEQUE: EVEN IN LARGE CASES

April 27, 2021 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

In Louis Dreyfus Company Suisse S.A. v International Bank of St. Petersburg (Joint-Stock Company) [2021] EWHC 1039 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver reduced a claim for costs substantially, even though costs were being awarded on the indemnity basis.   “it may…

COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47

COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47

March 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

An earlier post looked at the construction of the Part 36 offer in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division).  Here we look at…

WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T SETTLE AFTER A MEDIATION: NO ISSUE BASED ORDER, INDEMNITY COSTS AND £127,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON’T SETTLE AFTER A MEDIATION: NO ISSUE BASED ORDER, INDEMNITY COSTS AND £127,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

January 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

There is much for litigants and litigators to learn from the judgment on costs of James Mellor QC (sitting as a High Court judge)  in Cranstoun & Anor v Notta [2021] EWHC 133 (Ch).  The dangers of rejecting offers of…

INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER A JUDGMENT DEBTOR WAS EXAMINED: IN ADDITION THERE IS GOING TO BE A SECOND MATCH...

INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER A JUDGMENT DEBTOR WAS EXAMINED: IN ADDITION THERE IS GOING TO BE A SECOND MATCH…

November 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Shearer v Neal [2020] EWHC 3148 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC ordered that a debtor pay costs on the indemnity basis after she heard a Part 71 hearing. The case was also remitted to the High Court Judge on…

DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT OF THE CASE LED TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING PAID: MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF "NOT ACTING IN GOOD" FAITH: A SPECULATIVE & WEAK CASE: EXPERTS WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT OF THE CASE LED TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING PAID: MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF “NOT ACTING IN GOOD” FAITH: A SPECULATIVE & WEAK CASE: EXPERTS WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

September 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Experts, Members Content

This is the third (but not the last) look at the judgment on costs  in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387. The judge held that the defendant’s conduct of the case was such that…

"OUR CASE WAS SO HOPELESS YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT": LOSING PARTY SHOULD PAY THE COSTS OF CLAIMANTS PURSUING SPECULATIVE CLAIM: YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT

“OUR CASE WAS SO HOPELESS YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT”: LOSING PARTY SHOULD PAY THE COSTS OF CLAIMANTS PURSUING SPECULATIVE CLAIM: YOU CAN’T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT

July 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert today in  Bailey & Anorv Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1766 (QB) reflected the normal rule that the losing party should pay the costs of an action.  In this case the losing party was…

CLAIMANT BEATS OWN PART 36 OFFER: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD BECAUSE OF ITS CONDUCT

CLAIMANT BEATS OWN PART 36 OFFER: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD BECAUSE OF ITS CONDUCT

March 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp   for drawing my attention to the decision today of Mr Justice Griffiths in DSN v Blackpool Football Club Ltd [2020] EWHC 670 (QB).  The defendant was ordered to pay indemnity…

INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT'S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE...

INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE…

February 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 114 is the second time this case, about a garden, has been on appeal.   On this occasion the Court of Appeal held that the claimants’ conduct…

ARGUE A WEAK CASE ON EACH AND EVERY POINT, GET INDEMNITY COSTS AWARDED AGAINST YOU

ARGUE A WEAK CASE ON EACH AND EVERY POINT, GET INDEMNITY COSTS AWARDED AGAINST YOU

December 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Anor v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 3300 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare held that a claimant, who had pursued a weak case in a robust manner, should pay indemnity costs.   There is…

UNWARRANTED FRAUD ALLEGATION LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED

UNWARRANTED FRAUD ALLEGATION LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED

November 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Natixis SA v Marex Financial & Ors [2019] EWHC 2549 (Comm) an award of indemnity costs was made against a party who had alleged fraud all the way up to closing submissions.   It highlights the dangers of pleading fraud…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: PARTIES WHO ARE JOINED TO A SPECULATIVE ENTERPRISE IN LITIGATION SHOULD EVALUATE THEIR POSITION WITH CARE

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: PARTIES WHO ARE JOINED TO A SPECULATIVE ENTERPRISE IN LITIGATION SHOULD EVALUATE THEIR POSITION WITH CARE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

 In  Ford & Anor v Bennett & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1604 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a trial judge’s decision to award indemnity costs.  The judgment contains a lesson to “additional parties” to litigation. “Parties who…

AN OFFER THAT IMPOSES A CONDITION AS TO COSTS IS NOT A VALID PART 36 OFFER: MERE FAILURE TO ACCEPT REASONABLE OFFER DOES NOT LEAD TO INDEMNITY COSTS

AN OFFER THAT IMPOSES A CONDITION AS TO COSTS IS NOT A VALID PART 36 OFFER: MERE FAILURE TO ACCEPT REASONABLE OFFER DOES NOT LEAD TO INDEMNITY COSTS

June 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Knight & Anor v Knight & Ors (Costs) [2019] EWHC 1545 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) held that an offer that attempted to limit costs was not a valid Part 36 offer.   The judge…

"THE CLAIMANTS MUST RUE THE DAY THEY REJECTED THE DEFENDANT'S OFFER": CLAIMANT TO PAY STANDARD COSTS AFTER REJECTING VERY EARLY PART 36 OFFER

“THE CLAIMANTS MUST RUE THE DAY THEY REJECTED THE DEFENDANT’S OFFER”: CLAIMANT TO PAY STANDARD COSTS AFTER REJECTING VERY EARLY PART 36 OFFER

March 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The costs judgment in  Burgess & Anor v Lejonvarn [2019] EWHC 369 (TCC) is probably a judgment that should be shown to all litigants.  The claimant rejected an offer of £25,000 and failed to beat that offer at trial.   The defendant’s…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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…

SHAMEFUL LETTERS, LATE DISCONTINUANCE, INDEMNITY COSTS (AND A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE HARDLY COUNTS): THE CLAIMANT WHO LOST SIGHT OF "ANY BASIC STANDARD OF DECENT & COMPASSIONATE BEHAVIOUR"

SHAMEFUL LETTERS, LATE DISCONTINUANCE, INDEMNITY COSTS (AND A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE HARDLY COUNTS): THE CLAIMANT WHO LOST SIGHT OF “ANY BASIC STANDARD OF DECENT & COMPASSIONATE BEHAVIOUR”

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

Earlier posts have looked at the issue of aggressive correspondence. Others have looked at the issues of conduct, refusal to mediate and questions relating to indemnity costs. I am grateful to David Turner QC for drawing my attention to a…

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…

COURT OF APPEAL STATES INDEMNITY COSTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED: SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BULLISH IN BRADFORD...

COURT OF APPEAL STATES INDEMNITY COSTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED: SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BULLISH IN BRADFORD…

December 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is unusual for the Court of Appeal to interfere with a discretionary order in relation to costs. It is even more unusual for the court to replace an order for costs on the standard basis with indemnity costs. This…

CLAIMANT ACCEPTING PART 36 OFFER LATE: COURT ORDERED INDEMNITY COSTS FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN EXPIRY AND ACCEPTANCE

CLAIMANT ACCEPTING PART 36 OFFER LATE: COURT ORDERED INDEMNITY COSTS FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN EXPIRY AND ACCEPTANCE

December 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Lokhova v Longmuir [2017] EWHC 3152 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered the court’s discretion when a claimant accepted a defendant’s Part 36 offer late. KEY POINTS A court had jurisdiction to vary the normal order for costs when a claimant…

COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUANCE VARIED: CLAIMANT TO PAY INDEMNITY NOT STANDARD COSTS: TWO RIGHT FEET BROUGHT THE WRONG ACTION

COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUANCE VARIED: CLAIMANT TO PAY INDEMNITY NOT STANDARD COSTS: TWO RIGHT FEET BROUGHT THE WRONG ACTION

November 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content

When a claimant discontinues an action there is an automatic provision that the claimant pay the defendant’s costs (CPR 38.6). In Two Right Feet Ltd v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2017] EWHC 1745 (Ch) Ms Sara Cockerill Q.C. made…

COSTS AFTER LATE ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT'S PART 36 OFFER:  CLAIM £21.5 MILLION, ACCEPT £125,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF CLEAR VISION ON DAMAGES FROM THE OUTSET

COSTS AFTER LATE ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER: CLAIM £21.5 MILLION, ACCEPT £125,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF CLEAR VISION ON DAMAGES FROM THE OUTSET

November 5, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36

In Optical Express Ltd & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] EWHC 2707 (QB) Mr Justice Warby  considered arguments in relation to costs after late acceptance of a Part 36 offer.  On the facts of that case he ordered that the…

THE BANK OF IRELAND CASE ROUND TWO: APPROPRIATE SUMS FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED BECAUSE OF CONDUCT OF EXPERT

October 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Experts, Members Content

In an earlier post we looked at the judgment in Bank of Ireland -v- Watts Group PLC   [2017]EWHC 1667 (TCC) where Mr Justice Coulson was particularly excoriating about the claimant’s expert. Having lost the case the bank had to pay the…

SENSIBLE CONCESSIONS PLAY NO PART IN THE ORDERING OF INDEMNITY COSTS: ORDER MADE ON MERIT

SENSIBLE CONCESSIONS PLAY NO PART IN THE ORDERING OF INDEMNITY COSTS: ORDER MADE ON MERIT

September 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I have written about the substantive judgment in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC) several times already.  There is a shorter judgment on costs at  Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2017] EWHC…

A GOOD REASON WHY YOU SHOULD LOVE (OR AT LEAST MEDIATE WITH) THY NEIGHBOUR: INDEMNITY COSTS OF £200,000

August 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The Court of Appeal judgment in Dickinson & Anor v Cassillas [2017] EWCA Civ 1254 serves as a warning for anyone involved in a neighbour dispute. The Court dismissed the appellants’ appeal in relation to findings against them after a trial….

YOU OFFERED ME £100,000: I'VE ACCEPTED £15,000- OH AND I WANT MY COSTS: THE DANGERS OF NOT NEGOTIATING AND WHY THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS

YOU OFFERED ME £100,000: I’VE ACCEPTED £15,000- OH AND I WANT MY COSTS: THE DANGERS OF NOT NEGOTIATING AND WHY THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS

July 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

I tried to summarise the judgment of Mr Justice Mann in Jordan -v- MGN Limited [2017] EWHC 1937 (Ch) and I found it  difficult. Every word of the judgment is important.  It shows, at least, a very insouciant, approach by the…

CONSEQUENCES OF LATE ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

February 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

There is a useful report on the PIC website of a case where a claimant obtained indemnity costs after the defendant’s late acceptance of its Part 36 offer  The case of Car Craft Test Centre -v- Trotman a decision by…

APPLICATION FOR INDEMNITY COSTS REFUSED: THE JUDGE LOOKS AT THE COSTS BUDGET OF THE LOSING PARTY

February 4, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We have looked many times at cases where judges have considered granting indemnity costs.  This issue was considered by Mr Justice Coulson in MacInnes -v- Gross [2017]EWHC 127 (QB). One interesting aspect is that the judge looked at the losing…

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDER AGAINST DEFENDANT UPHELD BY COURT OF APPEAL: OFFERS AND CONDUCT: MANNA II

January 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content

The second post on the Court of Appeal decision in Manna -v- Central Manchester Hospitals NHS Trust [2017]  EWCA Civ 12 relates to the Court’s upholding of the trial judge’s award of indemnity costs. “A judge should in my view be…

COSTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND THE EXPENSIVE CONSEQUENCES OF A SIEGE BASED MENTALITY

January 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is surprising how often cases that have been looked at because of issues in relation to the evidence at trial are reported again on the issue of costs.  The Ocensa Pipeline Group Litigation case is such an action.  I…

COSTS AT THE END OF A CASE: INDEMNITY COSTS, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT AND GOING BEYOND THE COSTS BUDGET

December 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36, Risks of litigation, Uncategorized

In Barkhuysen -v- Hamilton [2016] EWHC 3371 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered matters relating to costs after a trial. The defendant’s conduct led to an order for indemnity costs being made. The judge also identified those areas in which the claimant…

PART 36 CONSEQUENCES AND A FIXED COSTS REGIME: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY MEET?

November 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Phonographic Performance Ltd -v- Raymond Hagan [2016] EWHC 3076 (IPEC) Judge Hacon considered the interaction between a fixed costs regime and Part 36. KEY POINTS The fixed cost rules in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court…

THIRD PARTY FUNDING: YOU WANT THE PROFITS YOU TAKE THE RISKS: EXCALIBUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

November 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Security for Costs, Third party funding, Uncategorized

In Excalibur Ventures LLC -v- Texas Keystone LLC [2016] EWCA Civ 1144 the Court of Appeal confirmed that commercial funders are liable to indemnify on the indemnity costs basis. “I can see no principled basis upon which the funder can…

LATE ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS: TWO CONTRASTING CASES & THE GREAT DEBATE

October 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

There is an ongoing debate about whether the Defendant should, or does, face any adverse consequences when a Claimant’s Part 36 offer is accepted late.  I had a recent email from solicitor John McQuater of Atherton Godfrey.   Here I…

PROVING THINGS 20: ALLEGATIONS OF IMPROPER CONDUCT HAVE TO BE PROVEN: INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED

May 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Collins -v- Thanet District Council Collins anor v Thanet DC anor (19 4 16)(Jud) 2 [2016] EWHC 1008 (QB) His Honour Judge Yelton (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered the evidence available to support allegations of misfeasance…

PART 36 OFFER DID NOT ENCOMPASS PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT: COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: A BAD DAY AT THE OFFICE

March 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal decision yesterday  in Littlestone -v- Macleish [2016] EWCA Civ 127 deals with important elements of Part 36 offers.  Not least the importance of stating, with absolute clarity, whether an offer is exclusive or inclusive of previous…

IS THIS A CLAIMANT'S OR DEFENDANT'S OFFER? ANOTHER IMPORTANT HIGH COURT DECISION ON PART 36

November 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Van Orrd Uk Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3385 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson considered the appropriate consequences when the defendant had beaten its own Part 36 offer. These were unusual circumstances in that the  court had to…

1 2 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 35.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • MAZUR RECORDING – NOW AVAILABLE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON’T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT…
  • THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION AGAINST THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS TO PROCEED TO STAGE 2: MUCH TO THINK ABOUT HERE FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS (AND INDEED ANYONE WHO DRAFTS PLEADINGS)
  • MAZUR MATTERS 9: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? (2): AN EARLY COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WHICH HELPS
  • PART 36: SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION SO THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 PROVISIONS DO NOT APPLY? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE “FORMIDABLE OBSTACLE”…

Top Posts

  • MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON'T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT...
  • MAZUR MATTERS 9: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION"? (2): AN EARLY COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WHICH HELPS
  • MAZUR RECORDING - NOW AVAILABLE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 8: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" (1): HOW HELPFUL ARE THE REGULATORS?
  • THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION AGAINST THE CLAIMANT'S SOLICITORS TO PROCEED TO STAGE 2: MUCH TO THINK ABOUT HERE FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS (AND INDEED ANYONE WHO DRAFTS PLEADINGS)

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.