This blog considers the development of the law since the case of Lewis and others v Ward Hadaway (a firm) in 2015, when the defendant tried to strike out a claim on the basis of the underpayment of court fees by the claimants. It will consider whether there is any recent trend of applying the case successfully and whether the case can be used to defeat applications to reallocate claims. Continue reading
Claim won with costs? It is not an unreasonable expectation in that case is it not, that there will be a guaranteed recovery from your opponent of the budgeted costs (those last approved or agreed insofar as you are within budget), plus a bit for the incurred costs? Consideration of any Part 36 offer made and, indeed, the couching and calculation of any Part 36 of your own, will be based as a starting point on those figures. Continue reading
Earlier this year, the High Court ruled that a Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) master was entitled to stay a consent order relating to detailed assessment because the clients were planning professional negligence proceedings against the solicitors. Continue reading
In BCS Corporate Acceptances Limited and others v Terry, Morris J discussed third party debt orders and whether such an order could be made over sums held in solicitors’ client accounts. Continue reading
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC v WPMC Ltd and another highlights the importance of warning a non-party at the earliest opportunity of the possibility that a costs application may be made against it. The sound of silence was fatal to such an application in Sony. Continue reading
In an increasingly global world the issues of international and extra-territorial jurisdiction are becoming increasingly important, as a recent flurry of cases and developments shows. Continue reading
A recent case, Bentley Design Consultants v Malcolm Sansom, has considered the interaction of the principle of construction of a contract and the procedural code contained in Part 36 of the CPR. The case concerned the proper construction of an offer to settle “the whole of this claim”. At both first instance and on appeal, it was held that the proper construction of the offer was to settle only part of the claim. Continue reading
Whilst most funding and insurance products have been designed with the claimant in mind, there are solutions that can be applied to defence situations. As with claimant cases, it is important to consider whether the aim is to relieve the cash flow burden of paying the legal fees in defending the claim, or whether the key objective is to ring fence the business’ liability to a fixed sum for budgeting purposes or to appease shareholder concerns about the potential of a catastrophic loss. Continue reading
The decision in Gardiner & Theobald LLP v Jackson is useful for anyone considering retaining an expert on a “no win, no fee basis” in civil litigation, as it sheds further light on the concerns the courts will have when asked to allow such an arrangement. Continue reading
Acting for and representing yourself: to what extent will your time and trouble be recompensed by your opponent if you win? Continue reading