‘The High Court has ruled that a costs settlement offer did not lapse when the detailed assessment had started – and the claimant was entitled to accept it mid-hearing.’
Law Society's Gazette, 26th May 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The starting point in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) is that no order for costs should be made against an unsuccessful regulator acting purely in its regulatory capacity, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 26th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Law Commission should review whether regulators such as the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) should be insulated from costs orders in disciplinary actions they lose, a Court of Appeal judge has suggested.’
Legal Futures, 26th May 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has called on the Civil Procedure Rules Committee to review the issue of whether disbursements should be payable separately in fixed-cost personal injury cases.’
Litigation Futures, 21st May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Conditional fee agreements have been a facet of contentious probate and estates litigation for many years and are, in many cases, the only realistic way for disappointed beneficiaries to fund litigation. This is particularly true of claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.’
St Johns Buildings, May 2020
Source: stjohnsbuildings.com
‘Re H (Deceased), SH v NH and KH [2020] EWHC 1134 (Fam) was a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 heard on 24 April and 24 May 2020 before Cohen J. The successful adult claimant was awarded a contribution of 25% to her CFA uplift by Cohen J as part of her claim. Re H was a case heard hot on the heels of Bullock v Denton in which the successful adult claimant in a 1975 Act claim was also awarded a cost contribution as part of her award.’
Parklane Plowden Chambers, 12th May 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘The High Court has penalised a successful party for refusing to engage in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), saying it had brought the litigation on itself as a result.’
Litigation Futures, 14th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The High Court has cut a costs award to a seriously injured claimant because exaggeration was “built into the structure” of the way the claim was presented before and during the trial.’
Litigation Futures, 13th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In a case in which fundamental dishonesty or fraud has not been found but, there has been a significant level of exaggeration, will the court reduce an award of costs? The answer, of course, is considering CPR Part 44: yes… possibly.’
Park Square Barristers, 5th May 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘The recent decision of DSN v Blackpool Football Club Limited [2020] EWHC 670 (QB) illustrates the need for litigating parties to consider and engage with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures in trying to resolve their disputes.’
Law Society's Gazette, 4th May 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Guidance on the conduct of remote detailed assessments (DAs) has been produced to get the system moving during the lockdown.’
Litigation Futures, 23rd April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The basic position is well-known: in principle, the costs of an inquest are recoverable in a subsequent clinical negligence claim. The leading case in this regard, also well-known, is Roach -v- Home Office [2010] QB 256.’
Ropewalk Chambers, April 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘The original dispute pertained to a claim (issued by the Respondent in these proceedings) which started under, and then exited, the Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents Protocol. On the first visit to the Court of Appeal, the issue was whether the Appellant’s (the Defendant in the original dispute) cost liability in respect of the ex-portal claim was limited to fixed costs. The Court of Appeal held that the fixed costs regime for which Section IIIA of CPR Part 45 provides was applicable and the parties had not contracted out of fixed costs. Absent any application by the Respondent pursuant to CPR 45.29J for a higher amount by reason of “exceptional circumstances”, the Respondent was thus entitled to £16,705.15 in respect of her costs of the claim. Resultingly, both parties had cost liabilities: the Appellant in regards to the ex-portal claim, and the Respondent in respect of the appeal.’
Parklane Plowden, 17th April 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘The new reality for litigation funders in the courts in England & Wales is that they must be prepared to pay a defendant’s costs in full if the funded claimant loses.’
Six Pump Court, 17th April 2020
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘Two fee-earners are not needed for attending a witness or client – and you cannot charge for solicitors travelling to clients.’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th April 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Judges in the Court of Appeal have urged rule-makers to look again at the nuances of qualified one-way costs shifting after a judgment over whether a defendant could set off their costs liability against the claimant.’
Law Society's Gazette, 16th April 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In this article, Gordon Wignall discusses the position of funding in England and Wales post-Chapelgate, where the automatic protection of the Arkin ‘cap’ was lifted. He also discusses grounds for the introduction of litigation funding in Ireland.’
Six Pump Court, 17th April 2020
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘The courts are getting harder on parties who fail to follow directions to try alternative dispute resolution (ADR), with judges imposing indemnity costs in two cases in recent weeks.’
Litigation Futures, 16th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has been tasked with reviewing the guideline hourly rates (GHR), it has emerged, with costs specialists urging it to revert to the old system of setting them locally.’
Litigation Futures, 17th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2020