Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Insurance Premiums
COST BITES 250: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT'S SOLICITOR BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER A FULL SUCCESS FEE AND THE ATE PREMIUM? A DECISION MADE ON APPEAL

COST BITES 250: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITOR BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER A FULL SUCCESS FEE AND THE ATE PREMIUM? A DECISION MADE ON APPEAL

July 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking at a decision made on appeal in relation to the very common issue of the percentage of a success fee and the taking out, and subsequent deduction from damages, of an After the Event Insurance policy.  The…

PROVING THINGS 87: FAILURE TO PROVE BASIC ELEMENTS MEANT THAT THE FULL PREMIUM WAS NOT RECOVERED

PROVING THINGS 87: FAILURE TO PROVE BASIC ELEMENTS MEANT THAT THE FULL PREMIUM WAS NOT RECOVERED

March 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Insurance, Insurance premiums, Members Content

I am grateful to Dominic Regan for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Baldwin in Nicolaou -v- Cass (Liverpool CC 1st November 2017).   The claimant failed to recover a substantial figure for a stage 2 premium…

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM OF £533,017.13 : EYE-WATERING DECISION FOR INSURERS

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM OF £533,017.13 : EYE-WATERING DECISION FOR INSURERS

November 30, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Insurance, Insurance premiums, Members Content

In Percy v Anderson-Young [2017] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer held that an after the event premium of £533,107.13 was recoverable. There was no sympathy for the defendant.   “… in my judgment, any sympathy for the Defendant here…

RECOVERY OF THE INSURANCE PREMIUM IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: 10 KEY POINTS

June 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content

The recent post on the decision in Nokes -v- Heart of England Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B6 highlighted the issues relating to recoverability of the premium in clinical negligence cases.  Here is a 10 point summary: 1.  ONLY  THAT PART…

AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM BOTH RECOVERABLE, REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE

June 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content

When is an after the event premium and when is it recoverable? The decision of Master Leonard (sitting as a Judge of the Mayor’s and City County Court) in Nokes -v- Heart of England Foundation Trusts [2015] EWHC B6 (Costs)…

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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • MI5: CONTEMPT OF COURT AND THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTERNAL REPORTS: THEY ARE ADMISSIBLE BUT CANNOT BE USED TO PROVE ANYTHING: A POINT OF GENERAL RELEVANCE NOT JUST SECRET AGENTS…
  • COST BITES 458: “PLEASE JUDGE WE’D LIKE MORE TIME TO PAY THE COSTS”: THE RULES AND CASES CONSIDERED
  • COSTS BITES 457 — A FAILED FRAUD CLAIM, INDEMNITY COSTS AND 14 DAYS TO PAY: “I CONSIDER THAT THIS WAS COMMERCIAL CONDUCT OUT OF THE NORM” (OH, AND YOU DON’T GET MORE TIME TO PAY JUST BECAUSE YOU’RE A LARGE ORGANISATION)
  • COST BITES 456: THE CLAIMANT HAD SUCCEEDED ON ALL FOUGHT POINTS: THERE WOULD BE NO REDUCTION OF ITS COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS IN A LANDLORD AND TENANT DISPUTE
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHY A SOLICITOR TAKES TO TAKE GREAT WHEN MAKING STATEMENTS: “AN UNIMPRESSIVE WITNESS ON WHOSE EVIDENCE I CAN PLACE LITTLE RELIANCE” (IS WHAT WE DON’T WANT TO SEE…)

Top Posts

WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT
EXPERT WATCH 84: THE TRIAL JUDGE'S APPROACH TO THE EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS WRONG: THE APPROACH IN TUI HAD TO BE CONSIDERED: AN IMPORTANT DECISION FOR HOUSING LAWYERS...

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.