An application for security for costs can be a significant part of any commercial litigation, and it is therefore important that practitioners are familiar with the relevant principles.
This blog considers two recent cases which have provided valuable guidance in this area, namely Pisante v Logothetis, in which the authors acted, and Rowe v Ingenious Media Holdings Plc.
The decision of Snowden J in NDH Properties Ltd v Lupton Fawcett LLP provides a welcome refresher in the law relating to the question of whether a solicitor can owe a duty of care to the opposing party.
Cometh the trial. Cometh the judgment. Cometh the costs.
What next?
Before the implementation of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) in 1998, the default rule was that the winners were awarded their costs to be paid by the losers, even though the victory might have been by just a short head. Win your claim by a guinea, and the costs were yours.
The CPR changed all that. Whilst the winner is still viewed as the party who receives the cheque, that does not necessarily mean that the costs are in the bag. For the past 20 years, the courts’ approach has been much more nuanced. Did the winner succeed on every point? Was the recovery in proportion to the pleaded claim? Was it reasonable to pursue those matters upon which there was no success or only a limited amount? If the winner does not tick those boxes, the costs order is likely to be adjusted downwards in order to reduce the loser’s liability.
