COST BITES 402: DOES THE FACT THAT LEGAL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID BY RELATIVES MEAN THAT A RESPONDENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS? THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE CONSIDERED
Here the court considered an argument that the indemnity principle meant that an unsuccessful respondent was not liable to pay the appellant’s costs. It was clear that the fees in question had been paid by family members and not the…
COST BITES 129: WHY EVERYONE HAS TO UNDERSTAND THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IN COSTS
In The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Idreess Malik [2023] EWHC 3213 (Admin) the Administrative Court sets out a key reminder of the central importance of the indemnity principle in relation to the recovery of legal costs. The…
IN-HOUSE COSTS RECOVER ON ASSESSMENT: THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IS NOT BREACHED
The question on the indemnity principle and in-house lawyers was another costs issue considered by Mostyn J in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin). The judge rejected an argument that the successful…
A BAD DAY IN COURT FOR THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS: COMPLICATED, OH SO COMPLICATED CFA AGREEMENTS: BREACHES OF THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE AND MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: AGREEMENTS “SO DARKLY PENNED AS TO BE INCOMPREHENSIBLE”
The judgment of Deputy Master Friston in Anthony v Collins [2020] EWHC B14 (Costs) makes for interesting reading. A highly complex series of conditional fee agreements were held to be in breach of the indemnity principle. There are important lessons…
COSTS NOT RECOVERED WHEN DEFENDANT NOT NAMED IN CFA: SENIOR COSTS OFFICE DECISION
The GWS website has a link to a decision of a decision of Deputy Master Friston made in the Senior Court Costs Office in Hailey -v- Assurance Mutuelle Des Motards (CCD 1405291). It relates to the question whether costs can…
You must be logged in to post a comment.