‘A High Court Master has called on the Civil Procedure Rules Committee (CPRC) to resolve the “tension” between the need to “spell out in the eventual bill” the costs of costs budgeting and to include them in Precedent H.’
Litigation Futures, 16th August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Jackson LJ is still toiling away at costs issues some 8 years after his main report. The original report changed the whole way in which the civil courts go about working how much, if anything, is due from one side to another at the end of a case – budgets being one key element. The main part of this new report concerns extending fixed costs further.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 31st July 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The Civil Procedure Rule Committee has decided against changing the financial threshold for costs budgeting in high-value personal injury cases, despite the prospect of the new discount rate taking a significant number of claims out of the regime.’
Litigation Futures, 17th July 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Recent uncertainty as to how a costs budget impacts on the final bill in relation to both incurred and estimated costs has, to some extent, been resolved by the judgment in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 792.’
Zenith PI, 6th July 2017
Source: zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘In a decision handed down yesterday, the Court of Appeal in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 791 determined important issues in costs budgeting. They are of relevance to all practitioners.’
Hailsham Chambers, 22nd June 2017
‘The chief master of the Chancery Division has outlined considerable reservations about making a comment on incurred costs as part of the budgeting process, saying there is “little or no value” in recording a general comment such as that they are “too high”.’
Litigation Futures, 4th July 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Lawyers and other users of the new media and communications list are unhappy with how the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) apply to the field, and particularly costs budgeting, according to the outcome of a consultation launched by Mr Justice Warby.’
Law & Religion UK, 3rd July 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Is access to justice an essential public service, akin to state schooling and lifelong healthcare free at the point of delivery? The Law Society believes it is – or at least should be – and pushes the point hard in a damning new report on the social consequences of swingeing funding and scope cuts to civil legal aid. Barriers erected by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders act (LASPO) in 2013 have denied justice to some of the most vulnerable people in society, Chancery Lane argues in Access Denied? LASPO four years on.’
Law Society's Gazette, 3rd July 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘An approved budget cannot be re-opened by a costs judge at detailed assessment unless there is “good reason” to do so, the Court of Appeal held today in a much-awaited ruling in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust.’
Law Society's Gazette, 21st June 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘James E. Petts sets out some key considerations for local authorities looking to recover their costs.’
Local Government Lawyer, 9th June 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The fall-out from the decision that the Law Society breached competition law looks set to last for several more months after the Competition Appeal Tribunal laid out the timetable for determining damages.’
Legal Futures, 5th June 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has accused costs lawyers of “abuse of the cost budgeting process” following an “unjustifiably low” estimate of the other side’s costs.’
OUT-LAW.com, 18th May 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘It is far from unknown, in my own experience of costs management hearings, for a party which does not expect to recover any costs (for example, a defendant in a case where liability has been admitted) to serve a very low costs budget.’
Zenith PI Blog, 16th May 2017
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘A defendant who offered very low sums in their budget discussion report in the hope that the court may compromise in the middle of the polarised figures put forward by the two sides is guilty of “an abuse of the cost budgeting process”, a High Court judge has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 15th May 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Legal Ombudsman’s (LeO) budget is set to rise for the first time since its creation – by £1m – with claims management companies not paying the case fees they have been charged the key cause and more expected to follow as they continue to go out of business.’
Legal Futures, 12th April 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Environmental lawyers at campaign group ClientEarth set deadline amid concern over repeated delays to publication of Government’s key plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.’
The Independent, 11th April 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has rejected strenuous attempts to dismiss the first application to certify an opt-out class action under the new collective proceedings procedure.’
Litigation Futures, 5th April 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The issue of costs budgets continues to occupy court time with The Honourable Mrs Justice Carr DBE the latest, and most senior, judge to give consideration to what, if any, weight an approved costs budget had when the bill of costs was the subject of a detailed assessment.’
Litigation Futures, 22nd March 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The fall-out is continuing from the recent High Court decision that budgets bind the parties at detailed assessment unless there is good reason not to, although it seems clear that parties are waiting for a definitive ruling from the Court of Appeal.’
Litigation Futures, 16th March 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A deputy High Court judge has refused to provide a receiving party with an “indication” of whether it acted reasonably in exceeding its costs budget, saying trial judges should “not seek to trammel the costs judge’s jurisdiction” unless there are specific issues they want to raise.’
Litigation Futures, 14th March 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024