Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Solicitor and own client assessment of costs
HOW COSTS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THE WORLD WAS YOUNG: SOLICITOR'S APPEAL AGAINST A REFUSAL TO ORDER A STAY AND SECURITY FOR COSTS DISMISSED: APPEAL FOR AN ORDER THAT SOLICITORS REPLY TO PART 18 QUESTIONS ALLOWED

HOW COSTS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THE WORLD WAS YOUNG: SOLICITOR’S APPEAL AGAINST A REFUSAL TO ORDER A STAY AND SECURITY FOR COSTS DISMISSED: APPEAL FOR AN ORDER THAT SOLICITORS REPLY TO PART 18 QUESTIONS ALLOWED

May 11, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs

In the judgment today in Edwards (& others) -v- Slater and Gordon UK Limited [2022] EWHC 1091 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie disallowed the defendant’s appeal in relation to issues relating to disclosure, funding and security for costs.  He allowed the…

THE SCOPE OF A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: DISPUTED EVIDENCE IS "GRIST TO THE MILL"

THE SCOPE OF A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: DISPUTED EVIDENCE IS “GRIST TO THE MILL”

January 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs

In Jones -v- Richard Slade & Co Ltd   [2021] EWHC B28 (Costs) Costs Judge Rowley rejected the defendant’s application to strike out points of claim in a Solicitors Act application. The judge held that it was possible, in a hearing…

SOLICITOR AND OWN COSTS ASSESSMENT: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION THAT CLIENT NOT LIABLE TO PAY ADDITIONAL COUNSEL'S FEES: SOLICITOR TERMINATED THE RETAINER AND COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS

SOLICITOR AND OWN COSTS ASSESSMENT: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION THAT CLIENT NOT LIABLE TO PAY ADDITIONAL COUNSEL’S FEES: SOLICITOR TERMINATED THE RETAINER AND COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS

December 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting

I wrote about the first instance decision in Murray v Richard Slade And Co Ltd [2021] EWHC 3383 (QB), in two posts in January this year, the first is here, the second here.  The claimant in that case (the solicitor…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS NOT UNFAIR OR UNREASONABLE: SENIOR COURT COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS NOT UNFAIR OR UNREASONABLE: SENIOR COURT COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

June 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Uncategorized

In Acupay System LLC v Stephenson Harwood LLP [2021] EWHC B11 (Costs) Costs Judge Leonard rejected a claimant’s argument that a conditional fee agreement it had entered into with a solicitor was unfair, unreasonable and not supported by consideration. (There…

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: NO SENSE OF PROPORTIONALITY HERE: SOME BASIC POINTS ON BILLS

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: NO SENSE OF PROPORTIONALITY HERE: SOME BASIC POINTS ON BILLS

October 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting

In Belsner v Cam Legal Services Ltd [2020] EWHC 2755 (QB) the parties were arguing about £385.40.   The judge observed “According to their statements of costs, the Claimant and the Defendant have spent £52,575.63 and £35,139.70 respectively on this appeal. That…

STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY

STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY

February 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs

In Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 178 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision striking out part of points of dispute. “Common sense dictates that the points of dispute must be drafted in a way which enables…

MASTER ENTITLED TO STRIKE OUT UNPARTICULARISED GROUNDS OF DISPUTE  IN SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: BE PARTICULAR OR ELSE...

MASTER ENTITLED TO STRIKE OUT UNPARTICULARISED GROUNDS OF DISPUTE IN SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: BE PARTICULAR OR ELSE…

June 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Striking out

In Ainsworth -v- Stewarts Law LLP [2019] EWCA Civ 897 HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge) dismissed an appeal against an order dismissing a former client’s challenge to work done on documents. The Master held that the claimant’s…

COSTS, COSTS LAWYERS, RESERVED AND UNRESERVED ACTIVITIES: PAYING PARTIES' ARGUMENTS LARGELY UNSUCCESSFUL

COSTS, COSTS LAWYERS, RESERVED AND UNRESERVED ACTIVITIES: PAYING PARTIES’ ARGUMENTS LARGELY UNSUCCESSFUL

May 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs

In  Allen v Brethertons LLP [2019] EWHC B3 (Costs) Master Leonard determined that the work done by a cost lawyer, and the team working with her, were recoverable costs.  I am grateful to Mark Carlisle for drawing my attention to…

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

April 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision on a solicitor and own client assessment that the additional liability in a simple personal injury case should be 15%. It allowed…

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE

SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SPECIFIC SUM FOR PAST COSTS NOT UNFAIR AND NOT SET ASIDE

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Costs

The judgment of Master Brown in Whitaker v Richard Slade & Company Plc [2018] EWHC B17 (Costs) may have some interesting implications for solicitor and own-client costs.  In particular the finding that an agreement in relation a specific sum for work…

TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE II: THE RISE OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS DISPUTES

October 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Uncategorized

One of the predictions made by several speakers at the Association of Costs Lawyers conference last week was the likelihood of a rise in the number of solicitor and own client disputes in relation to costs. Clients are now paying…

SOLICITOR'S BILL OF COSTS STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIM WAS EXAGGERATED AND (IN PART) FALSE

November 11, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Striking out

In Alpha Rocks Solicitors -v- Alade [2014] EWHC 3606 (Ch) Kevin Prosser Q.C., sitting as a judge of the High Court, struck out part of the solicitor’s bill as an abuse of process. The case makes instructive reading.  It involved…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2022. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 26,221 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES LEADS TO PARTS OF A CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT BEING STRUCK OUT: COMPLY WITH THE RULES – OR ELSE
  • IS THE CCMCC BREAKING THE LAW ?THE DAMAGES PILOT AND CASES WHERE THE CCMC ARE REFUSING TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS: WHAT IS THE RELEVANT DATE FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES?
  • WITNESS DEMEANOUR: ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: THINKING ABOUT DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS FROM THE OUTSET: WEBINAR 20th JULY 2022
  • “THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE”: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE’S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED

Top Posts & Pages

  • WITNESS DEMEANOUR: ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • IS THE CCMCC BREAKING THE LAW ?THE DAMAGES PILOT AND CASES WHERE THE CCMC ARE REFUSING TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS: WHAT IS THE RELEVANT DATE FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES?
  • FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES LEADS TO PARTS OF A CLAIMANT'S WITNESS STATEMENT BEING STRUCK OUT: COMPLY WITH THE RULES - OR ELSE
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: THINKING ABOUT DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS FROM THE OUTSET: WEBINAR 20th JULY 2022
  • "THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE": RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE'S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED

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 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2022 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin