COST BITES 377: THE COURT WOULD NOT STAY A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PENDING THE DEFENDANT’S APPEAL AND/OR APPLICATION FOR A RIGHT TO SET OFF THEIR OWN COSTS (WHY WHAT IS TAKEN OUT OF DRAFT ORDER CAN BE AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS LEFT IN…)
Here we have an unusual issue, caused by the defendant agreeing to an unusual order (more accurately the removal of a proposed term of an order). The defendant was liable to pay the claimant’s costs of a hearing which were…
COST BITES 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
We are returning to a point that can easily be overlooked by a party that has been successful at a split trial or a trial of a preliminary issue. Although the court may make an order in that party’s favour,…
COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION – AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A “CAUTIOUS APPROACH” TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EVIDENCE
This judgment given today contains a number of important points in relation to costs. The headline point is obviously an interim award of £43 million was made. This was actually less than 50% of the sum being sought. One of…
COST BITES 329: THE COURT’S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR “OVERSPENDS” – COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET
Some of the basic principles upon which the courts make orders for interim payments are well established, particularly when the case has been budgeted. This case considers the appropriate approach when there is a claim for costs arising from interlocutory…
COST BITES 325: DOES THE FACT THAT THERE WOULD BE COMPLEX ISSUES ON DETAILED ASSESSMENT MEANT THE COURT SHOULD NOT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF COSTS ON ACCOUNT?
The rules, and often the courts, are keen to encourage payments on account of costs. They have advantages to both parties. The receiving party receives a large percentage of costs promptly, the paying party reduces the amount of interest that…
INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: RECEIVING PARTY CAN ASK (AND RECEIVE) MORE THAN ONCE
I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon for sending me a note of the judgment of Master MCloud in Trotman -v- Master Brickwork London Essex Limited, a copy of which is available here. Trotman – final judgment of…
A CRI DE COEUR FOR MORE MONEY WON’T GET YOU AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: MASTER EMPHASISES THE NEED FOR HARD EVIDENCE
In RXK v Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2751 (QB) Master Cook made some important observations about the quality of evidence needed to obtain an interim order for costs in an ongoing case. (The judgment in X -v-…
INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I wrote on the judgment in I – interim payment of costs. in an earlier post. An article on the Switalskis website today states that the Court of Appeal refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal.( I know that the…
INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD
I am grateful to Jim Gladman from Switalskis, solicitors for sending me a copy of the approved judgment of HHJ Robinson in I -v- Hull & East Yorkshire NHS Trust (25th February 2019). A copy of that judgment is available…
THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS
Judgments dealing with payments on account of costs are rare, but illuminating. Particularly when the costs budget is taken as the starting point. There is a detailed consideration of this issue in Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018]…
You must be logged in to post a comment.