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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)
  • PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES INTRODUCED YESTERDAY: NEW PROVISIONS IN THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL: “OTHER REMEDY” CLAIMS CAN NOW BE MADE
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 15: THE STUDENTS LOAN COMPANY MAY BE AN “EMANATION OF THE STATE”: SOME INTERESTING ISSUES HERE: THESE ARE ISSUES OF LAW – NOT ONE ON WHICH A WITNESS CAN EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW…
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A “HYPOTHETICAL” RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT’S ACTION FAILED

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.