Proportionality is something that is considered from the pre-action stage, right through to assessment of costs. It has become a term that is familiar to some and feared by many. On 1 April 2013, a new test of proportionality came in to force by virtue of CPR 44.3(2)(a), whereby costs that are disproportionate in amount … Continue reading Proportionality: the new political correctness
It is now 11 years since the Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA) was passed and eight since the regulatory regime it created fully came into being. And still, unfortunately, there are those elsewhere in the legal profession who do not recognise the difference between costs lawyers and costs draftsmen.
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.
We are five months into the compulsory electronic bill of costs and so far all is quiet. Obviously it will take time before cases affected by the change hit the courts, but research undertaken by the Association of Costs Lawyers has shown that many solicitors and judges were not ready for the new bill when … Continue reading Were lawyers ready for the electronic bill of costs?
Fixed costs (and how to avoid them) have been a hot topic in recent months. Earlier this year, in Bratek v Clark-Drain Ltd, the High Court found that it was not possible to contract out of the fixed costs regime attaching to the Road Traffic Accident (RTA) and Employers’ Liability/Product Liability (EL/PL) protocols by providing … Continue reading Fixed costs and accepting a Part 36 offer: Hislop v Perde
Since their introduction in 2013, the pre-action protocols for low-value personal injury claims have been fertile ground for costs jurisprudence, particularly cases involving receiving parties’ attempts to circumvent the fixed costs regime in CPR 45.
The question of whether a reduction in hourly rates for incurred costs is a good reason to do the same to budgeted costs is a big one at the moment, absent higher court authority. Recently, Master Rowley in the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) had his say, and joined what seems to be the majority … Continue reading Reduction in hourly rates for incurred costs: Jallow v Ministry of Defence
The issue of funding is often one which causes satellite litigation. Indeed, it may have been one of the driving factors behind the civil justice reforms. When the ideas of Jackson LJ were enshrined into legislation in the form of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), it was envisaged that … Continue reading Switching from legal aid to CFA: Surrey v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust
The new form electronic bill, coming into force tomorrow (6 April 2018), is “bound to save time and costs” and soon “people will be amazed that we had put up with the old paper-based bill for so long”, Jackson LJ predicted as he reflected on his reforms ahead of his retirement from the bench on … Continue reading E-day arrives
In May 2017, Master Rowley handed down judgment in Tucker v Griffiths and Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, dealing with various issues arising as preliminary points in a detailed assessment. The case centred on an alleged mis-certification of the claimant’s budget and, flowing from that, also dealt with hourly rates and good reason to depart … Continue reading Incurred costs: Tucker v Griffiths and Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Though the article and the decision in May and another v Wavell Group Ltd and another contains nods to Queen (the case involves guitarist Brian May), ultimately it relates to Jackson LJ’s vision of proportionality and the differing interpretations that have followed.
Costs budgeting, as we know it today, has been around for less than four years. It was only last June in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust that the Court of Appeal provided much needed clarification on the approach to be adopted by costs judges on detailed assessment on departing from approved … Continue reading Our survey says: ACL’s findings on costs budgeting
Am I being overcharged? That is the question that many business and private clients are now asking. There is an increasing demand for advice from costs lawyers, solicitors and barristers specialising in costs law, with the aim, in this time of austerity, to challenge solicitors’ claims for costs and hopefully secure a saving. All solicitors … Continue reading Harrison v Eversheds: how much should the client pay?
In the past, perhaps the mention of costs budgeting itself was good reason for many a law practitioner to depart hastily from a conversation. However, this complex issue has been further complicated by the inevitable fall-out of the decision in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust, where the Court of Appeal determined … Continue reading Budgeting: a good reason to depart?
The Court of Appeal’s recent ruling in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust was not so much a gentle nudge to solicitors on the importance of costs budgeting, but a sharp elbow in the ribs.
You are faced with a claim for personal injuries and you make a Part 36 offer with a view to affording costs protection. It transpires that your Part 36 offer is successful and you look to recover your costs. By way of illustration:
Back in 2009, my client, a multinational law firm, obtained an award for costs in a piece of litigation for the European Central Bank. Needless to say, its client was invoiced in euros, by reference to euro hourly rates, yet the assessment of costs proceeded by reference to figures converted into sterling.
By the end of 2015, the majority of litigation practitioners had become accustomed to the intricacies of costs management. Whilst the occasional surprise continued to occur before some district judges, after almost three years the majority of kinks in the system had been resolved. However, the status quo was upset in January 2016 by the … Continue reading Sarpd Oil International v Addax Energy SA and another: managing the costs of a changing landscape
A new format for the good old bill of costs is sneaking up on the profession with increasing speed.
We are more than three years into costs management and it is fair to say that lawyers are still a long way from getting fully to grips with the practice.
The widely reported chief Chancery master’s decision in Signia Wealth Ltd v Marlborough Trust Company Ltd & another indicates a marked departure in approach by the court from the early days of the Jackson reforms and costs budgeting.
Any advice given to clients should be tempered, as far as possible, with how that advice may impact on them in the future, as well as with how a judge might view that advice in determining the reasonableness of a decision taken on its basis. To my knowledge, nobody has a crystal ball to see into the future, … Continue reading Mediate or not, that is the question
Every year the Association of Costs Lawyers undertakes a survey of members. This year we received 126 responses, which amounts to more than a fifth of our membership.
This is a key question that has been asked by many civil litigation practitioners, particularly following implementation of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO).
Since costs management was introduced in April 2013, one of its key difficulties has been the strain that it has placed on the court’s resources. In part, this is due to often hotly contested arguments over the party’s respective budgets. The pressure became so great in the RCJ that cost budgeting in clinical negligence matters … Continue reading Costs management changes in the 83rd CPR update: increased opportunity for agreement