COST BITES 263: QOCS AND CLAIMS AGAINST THE POLICE – A SIMILAR ISSUE TO YESTERDAY BUT WITH A TOTALLY DIFFERENT RESULT (NO ONE EVER SAID LITIGATION WAS EASY…)
Yesterday we looked at a case where, on appeal, the judge indicated that he would set aside a costs order made against the claimants who had brought an action against the police. The claimants had QOCS protection. Today we look…
COST BITES 262: THE CLAIMANTS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ORDERED TO PAY COSTS IN A “MIXED” CLAIM AGAINST THE POLICE
Here we are looking at issues relating to costs in an action that included a claim for personal injury but also included other elements. The question the appellate judge had to decide was whether the trial judge had applied the…
WHEN QOCS DOES NOT APPLY TO THE WHOLE OF A CLAIM: WHAT PERECENTAGE SHOULD THE CLAIMANTS PAY: THE MATTER CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
For the second time today we are looking at the rules relating to Qualified one way costs shifting (QOCS) and its exceptions. Here the defendant had spent £2 million successfully defending a claim, only part of that action was a…
THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON THE LIABILITY OF CREDIT HIRE COMPANIES TO PAY COSTS: THE SPECIFIC CASES EXAMINED
This is the second post about the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to the liability of credit hire companies to pay costs. Here we look at the decisions made in relation to each of the two cases under…
WILL A COSTS ORDER NORMALLY BE MADE AGAINST A CREDIT HIRE COMPANY? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING
This is the first of several points that will look in detail at the Court of Appeal decision today in relation to the liability of credit hire companies to pay costs. This first post outlines the main findings. Later posts…
COST BITES 220: QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO CO-CLAIMANTS WHO DO NOT BRING A CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY: NOR DOES IT APPLY WHEN A CASE IS STRUCK OUT
In BB & Ors v Khayyat & Ors [2025] EWHC 443 (KB) Mr Justice Soole rejected an argument that claimants who had not brought an action for personal injury could have the benefit of QOCS protection. The fact that they…
COST BITES 151: DOES QOCS APPLY TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT? YES IT DOES – BUT THE DEFENDANT HAS PERMISSION TO APPEAL
In Challis v Bradpiece [2024] EWHC 1124 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered of whether a claimant had QOCS protection in detailed assessment. He concluded that the claimant continued to have costs protection. He accepted that the point was…
QOCS: CLAIMS FOR £1 IN DAMAGES AND NOMINAL DAMAGES STILL HAVE QOCS PROTECTION
In Clark & Ors v Adams & Anor [2024] EWHC 62 (KB) Mr Justice Soole determined that claims for £1 in damages and for “vindicatory purposes only” still have the protection of QOCS. The size of the claim and the…
COST BITES 120: QOCS AND HIRE CHARGES: DECISION THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS OUTSIDE QOCS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL
In Amjad v UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 2832 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie overturned a decision that the QOCS cap should be lifted in relation to a claimant who had failed to beat the defendant’s Part 36 offer and who…
COST BITES 107: A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER SHOULD NOT BE MADE AGAINST A SOLICITOR REPRESENTING A CLAIM ON A CFA BASIS: SEEKING A FINANCIAL BENEFIT DID NOT MEAN THEY WERE ACTING OUTSIDE THEIR ROLE AS SOLICITOR
I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Freedman in The Scout Association -v- Bolt Burdon Kemp [2023] EWHC 2575 (KB). On appeal Freedman J upheld the…
DEFENDANT NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO ENFORCE COSTS IN A CASE WHERE THERE WAS A “MIXED CLAIM”
I am grateful to Kevin Donoghue from Donoghue solicitors for bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 1974 (KB). It is a…
PART 36, LATE ACCEPTANCE AND QOCS: COURT OF APPEAL DECIDE AN UNUSUAL ISSUE: A COURT CANNOT MAKE AN ORDER PROTECTING A PARTY AGAINST A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE RULES
In Tabbitt v Clark [2023] EWCA Civ 744 the Court of Appeal rejected an application for a declaration that would have “future proofed” the claimant’s position in relation to liability for costs following late acceptance of the defendant’s Part 36…
COST BITES 90: CLAIMANTS LIABLE TO PAY 5% OF DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HUMAN RIGHTS, PERSONAL INJURIES AND “MIXED CLAIMS”
In ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors, Re Costs [2023] EWHC 1337 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill considered the liability of the claimants to pay costs in a “mixed claim” which was, primarily, a personal injury claim. She…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS FROM APRIL 6th: OMNIBUS EDITION
The new rules on QOCS come into force on the 6th April. Here is a review of the key points as to issue, the consequences and links to useful commentary. WHEN THE RULES COME INTO FORCE The key date…
APRIL 5th IS AN IMPORTANT DATE: WHAT IS MEANT BY “ISSUED” IN THE CONTEXT OF CHANGES TO QOCS?
The new rules relating to the ability to set off defendant’s costs liabilities against a claimant’s costs and damages have, I am told, led to a rush to issue proceedings and a backlog in some courts. These rules come into…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS 3: WHAT INFORMED COMMENTATORS ARE SAYING: & TWO USEFUL WEBINARS
In the third in this series I thought it would be useful to highlight what informed commentators are saying in relation the new rules. I have gathered a range of views below. I have taken some key comments, however reading…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS 2: WHAT THEY DO AND WHEN THEY DO IT FROM…
This is the second in the series that examines the new rules as to QOCS coming into force on the 6th April 2023. Here we look at the impact of the new rules and the date of implementation. …
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM
In Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s appeal, which was an attempt to subvert the principles of Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”). The claimant discontinued the action…
A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO QOCS PROTECTION: THAT WAS NOT WHAT THE JACKSON REFORM WERE FOR…
I am grateful to barrister Stephen Elphick for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gargan in Sutcliffe -v- Ali (County Court at Middlesbrough 15th January 2021). It is a case that deals with the issue of whether…
THE SET OFF OF COSTS AND QOCS: A HIGH COURT DECISION: THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION TO SET OFF COSTS – BUT ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE WOULD NOT DO SO
In the judgment given this morning in Faulkner -v- Secretary of State for Energy and Industrial Strategy [2020] EWHC 296 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the issue of whether a defendant, ordered to pay costs when failing in an application…
QOCS IN “MIXED “CASES: THE COURT OF APPEAL SPEAKS
In the judgment today in Brown v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1724 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of QOCS in “mixed cases”. The judgment requires careful reading. Generally speaking all personal…
DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE
I am grateful to Barrister Kevin Latham for sending me details of the decision of HHJ Venn in Waring -v- McDonell [2018] EW Misc B11 (CC). A link to the full decision is also available at the foot of Kevin’s…
FULL QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO “MIXED CLAIMS”: THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
In The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Brown [2018] EWHC 2046 (Admin) Mrs Justice Whipple held that a claim against the police for misuse of data, misfeasance in public office and misuse of private information, did not give rise…
APPEALS, QOCS AND SET OFF: MORE ON THE DECISION IN CARTWRIGHT -V- VENDUCT: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED SET OFF OF APPEAL COSTS
I am grateful to Gary Brankin and Jeremy Rae of BC Legal for providing more information about the decision in Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654, the court of Appeal decision on QOCS considered yesterday. This is a point on…
TOMLIN ORDER PREVENTS “SUCCESSFUL” DEFENDANT RECOVERING COSTS FROM CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES IN A QOCS CASE: BUT CHOOSE YOUR DEFENDANTS CAREFULLY
In Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to the recoverability of costs in multi-defendant cases where the claimant would normally have the protection of qualified one-way costs shifting. The case provides…
QOCS IN HYBRID CASES: CLAIMANT NOT ENTITLED TO FULL EXTENT OF QOCS PROTECTION: ORDERED TO PAY 25% OF THE COSTS
In the judgment today in Siddiqui v University of Oxford [2018] EWHC 536 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett considered an issue as to costs where the claim brought was partially a personal injury claim. The judge held that the claim, for…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED ON APPEAL: WHEN A CLAIMANT DIGS A BIG HOLE FOR THEMSELVES THE COURT SHOULD NOT STRUGGLE TO EXTRACT THEM
In London Organising Committee of the Olympic And Paralympic Games (LOCOG) v Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles overturned a decision whereby a claimant was allowed damages. The claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in making a claim for…
ALLEGING AND FINDING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY, PLEADING AND EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY
I am grateful to barrister Tom Vonberg for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal decision today in Howlett -v- Ageas [2017] EWCA Civ 1696. Howlett & anr v Davies & anr- jt Final-1. Tom acted for the…
QOCS: THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: CLAIMANTS CANNOT BLOW HOT AND COLD
In the judgment today in Catalano -v- Espley Tyas Development Group Limited [2017] EWCA Civ 1132 the Court of Appeal considered the transitional provisions relating to QOCS. “We cannot accept that Mr McGee is right. Not only does he seek…
MIB CLAIM IS SUBJECT TO QOCS: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURN HOWE
“For the purposes of CPR Part 44.13, which describes the claims eligible for Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”), what is a claim for damages for personal injury? As Stewart J said it is a simple question but does not yield…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FINDING SET ASIDE ON APPEAL
The judgment of His Honour Judge Hodge QC in Meadows -v- La Tasca Restaurants Limited [2016]EW Misc B28 (CC) (16 June 2016) is now available on Bailli. It contains some important observations about findings of fundamental dishonesty. “In my judgment,…
QOCS & DISCONTINUANCE: ANOTHER CASE (WHERE THE CLAIMANT WAS SUCCESSFUL)
I am grateful to barrister James Bentley for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Recorder Berkley in Magon -v- Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance PLC (26th February 2016). Another decision in relation to QOCS and discontinuance. The District Judge…
CLAIMANT ESTOPPED FROM RELYING ON QOCS: THE NEED TO BE ACCURATE
I am grateful to barrister Matthew White for sending me details and a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Lopez in Price -v- Egbert H Taylor & Company Limited (16th June 2016). This is the second judgment in the…
QOCS CONTINUE TO APPLY ON APPEAL: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Parker -v- Butler [2016] EWHC 1251 (QB) Mr Justice Edis decided that QOCS protection continued to apply when a claimant appealed. “To construe the word “proceedings” as excluding an appeal which was necessary if he were to succeed in…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THE PAST 12 MONTHS: A ROUND UP
On May 10th last year I did a round up of cases and commentary on the issue of fundamental dishonesty. Here we look at cases and commentary in the past 12 months. CASES Most of the cases are inevitably first…
QOCS AND DISHONESTY: YOU CAN TRY TO CHECK OUT ANY TIME YOU LIKE BUT YOU CAN’T ALWAYS LEAVE
Thanks to Sintons LLP there is now a copy available online of the judgment of HH Judge Gosnell in Rouse -v- Aviva Insurance Limited (15th January 2016). This is another case that relates to discontinuance by the claimant in a…
THE LIMITS OF QOCS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
NB THIS DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED ON APPEAL. SEE THE POST ON THE APPEAL AVAILABLE HERE In Howe -v- Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2016] 884 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart considered the meaning of an action for “personal injury”. He held that…
KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW
A review of QOCS, Section 57 and Set off. Kerry Underwood. £25.00. Available online here Qualified one way costs shifting is here to stay. It may be extended to other areas. A detailed knowledge of the rules and regulations is…
DEFENDANT COUNTERCLAIMING EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AGAINST FRAUDULENT CLAIMANTS: AN INTERESTING REPORT
There is a report in the DWF update section of the case of Akhtar & Khan -v- Ball, a decision of HHJ Gregory on 10.7.15. It raises an interesting issue in relation to a counterclaim by a defendant faced with…
THE EFFECT OF QOCS ON LITIGATION: HERE'S THE THING: CASES WILL BE FOUGHT ON THEIR MERITS
There has been much debate about the impact of QOCS on litigation. To date much of this has, inevitably, been speculative. However it is worthwhile reading George Riley’s article, Fundamental dishonesty and litigation in the post-Jackson landscape. This shows, honestly…
QOCS, STRIKING OUT AND THE LIABILITY TO PAY IN FULL: A COUNTY COURT DECISION
I am grateful to Colm Nugent of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the judgment in Wall -v- British Canoe Union. A decision of HH Judge Lopez in Birmingham County Court on the 30th July 2015. The judgment…
THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS OF QOCS: IMPORTANT AND INTERESTING DECISION: THE MEANING OF "PROCEEDINGS"
There is an interesting decision on checkmylegalfees.com website in relation to the transitional provisions of the QOCS regulations. The full transcript of Casseldine -v- The Diocese of Llandaff Board for Social Responsibility (Regional Costs Judge Phillips, Cardiff County Court 15th…
SETTING ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE IN A QOCS CASE: TWO INTERESTING DECISIONS
I am grateful to Rebecca Jones of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me details of an important decision in relation to setting aside a notice of discontinuance served by a claimant in a costs case. The note of the judgment below…
"FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY" A ROUND UP OF CASES & COMMENTARY
The earlier post on the procedural aspects of “fundamental” dishonesty led to the most visitors to the blog in a weekend ever. Here we look at posts, articles, comments and cases in relation to the concept of fundamental dishonesty. REPORTED…
MORE ABOUT QOCS: CAN THEY APPLY ON APPEAL IF THE CLAIMANT HAD A PRE-APRIL 2013 CFA?
An earlier post on the risks posed by the transitional provisions of QOCS led to several comments. One of those comments was the question whether you can get QOCS protection on appeal if the original CFA did not cover appeals….
THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS OF QOCS: A DANGER AREA
I have seen a few problems recently with the transitional provisions of QOCS. In essence if the claimant has entered into a conditional fee agreement at any time in the past then they cannot have the benefit of QOCS. A…
You must be logged in to post a comment.