Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Solicitor and own client costs assessment
COST BITES 346: CONDUCT,  "PART 36 OFFERS" AND THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ON A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: THE COSTS OF "ASSESSMENT" ARE DISTINCT TO THE COSTS OF "PROCEEDINGS"

COST BITES 346: CONDUCT, “PART 36 OFFERS” AND THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ON A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: THE COSTS OF “ASSESSMENT” ARE DISTINCT TO THE COSTS OF “PROCEEDINGS”

February 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In this judgment given yesterday a Costs Judge considered the relevance of conduct in a Solicitors Act assessment. In particular whether an offer expressed as a “Part 36 offer” by the claimant client could amount to “special circumstances” to displace…

COST BITES 277: WHEN A CLIENT CHALLENGES A SOLICITOR'S BILL BUT IS OUTSIDE THE TIME PERIODS FOR CHALLENGE IN THE SOLICITORS ACT: THE RESIDUAL ISSUE OF COSTS BEING REASONABLE AND THE COMMON LAW ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 277: WHEN A CLIENT CHALLENGES A SOLICITOR’S BILL BUT IS OUTSIDE THE TIME PERIODS FOR CHALLENGE IN THE SOLICITORS ACT: THE RESIDUAL ISSUE OF COSTS BEING REASONABLE AND THE COMMON LAW ASSESSMENT

September 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at a case that reminds us that a client’s ability to challenge the reasonableness of solicitor’s costs can go outside the Solicitors Act.  Even when the time for challenging the bill has passed the court can…

COST BITES 253: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL IN HOLCROFT -V- THORNEYCROFT SOLICITORS - BY CONSENT: AN "AGREEMENT" AS TO THE DEDUCTION OF COSTS DOES NOT PREVENT A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 253: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL IN HOLCROFT -V- THORNEYCROFT SOLICITORS – BY CONSENT: AN “AGREEMENT” AS TO THE DEDUCTION OF COSTS DOES NOT PREVENT A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT

July 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The case of  Holcroft -v- Thorneycroft has been discussed on this site in the past. The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal, by consent, setting aside the original orders and directing that the defendants pay the costs of the …

COST BITES 242: THE WORDING OF THE RETAINER DID NOT ENABLE THE SOLICITOR TO RENDER INTERIM STATUTE BILLS: THE BILLS HAD INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN ANY EVENT

COST BITES 242: THE WORDING OF THE RETAINER DID NOT ENABLE THE SOLICITOR TO RENDER INTERIM STATUTE BILLS: THE BILLS HAD INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN ANY EVENT

June 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for sending me a copy of the decision we are looking at today.  Another case on the ongoing saga of whether a retainer allows a solicitor to serve interim statute bills.   The…

COST BITES 187: SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN MENZIES -v- OAKWOOD: THE BILL CAN GO FORWARD FOR ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 187: SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN MENZIES -v- OAKWOOD: THE BILL CAN GO FORWARD FOR ASSESSMENT

October 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

In the judgment today in Oakwood Solicitors Ltd (Respondent) v Menzies (Appellant) [2024] UKSC 34 the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal decision. The upshot of this is that there will now be an assessment of the solicitor/own client…

COST BITES 159: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT'S DAMAGES: THE GOLDEN RULE - THAT THE CLIENT SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED

COST BITES 159: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE GOLDEN RULE – THAT THE CLIENT SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED

July 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking again at the judgment in  St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB).  The judge considered the question of whether the client had been informed that the budget had been exceeded and that the solicitors…

COST BITES 158: SOLICITOR WAS ONLY ENTITLED TO SUCCESS FEE AND NO FURTHER COSTS: HIGH COURT DECISION ON APPEAL

COST BITES 158: SOLICITOR WAS ONLY ENTITLED TO SUCCESS FEE AND NO FURTHER COSTS: HIGH COURT DECISION ON APPEAL

July 4, 2024 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Success Fees

In St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB) Mr Justice Constable allowed an appeal against a decision that a solicitor was entitled to deduct additional costs from the claimant’s damages. The judge held that the terms of…

COST BITES 108: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: THE NEED FOR THE LAWYER TO GIVE ACCURATE ESTIMATES OF COST AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF INACCURACY (THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE SOLICITOR)

COST BITES 108: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: THE NEED FOR THE LAWYER TO GIVE ACCURATE ESTIMATES OF COST AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF INACCURACY (THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE SOLICITOR)

October 23, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in Kenton v Slee Blackwell PLC [2023] EWHC 2613 (SCCO) provides an object lesson in the perils of the clear warnings and advice that clients have to be given in relation to 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

  • MAZUR MATTERS 64: THE COURT REJECTS WOULD BE APPELLANT’S ARGUMENT THAT A CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 86: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND DEFENCE ON THE MORNING OF TRIAL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DEFENDANT IS NOT THE CLAIMANT’S KEEPER: ANOTHER CASE WHERE (MIS) SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM LED TO GRIEF
  • CALCULATORS FOR LAWYERS: A CALCULATOR “SUITE” BUILT BY A WORKING BARRISTER: 14 DAYS FREE TRIAL
  • COST BITES 411: NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST CLAIMANT’S DIRECTOR : HE WHO EXPECTS TO BENEFIT RUNS A RISK OF PAYING THE COSTS…

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

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.