Can’t afford to sue? Who do you call? – The Times

Posted April 16th, 2009 in costs, news by sally

“Third parties bankrolling litigation used to be anathema. The credit crunch has brought a sea change.”

Full story

The Times, 16th April 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Regina (Mendes and Another) v Southwark London Borough Council – Times Law Reports

Posted April 7th, 2009 in costs, judicial review, law reports, reasons by sally

Regina (Mendes and Another) v Southwark London Borough Council

Court of Appeal

“A judge needed to give reasons for preferring one side’s arguments over the other on an application made by written submissions concerning costs.”

The Times, 7th April 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

R (Mendes and another) v Southwark London Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted March 26th, 2009 in costs, judicial review, law reports, reasons by sally

R (Mendes and another) v Southwark London Borough Council; [2009] WLR (D) 108

“A judge needed to give reasons for preferring one side’s arguments over the other on an application for costs made by written submissions following the case being settled.”

WLR Daily, 25th March 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Jackson review triggers debate over costs in top-end litigation – Legal Week

Posted March 26th, 2009 in costs, news by sally

“Concerns have been raised about whether Lord Justice Rupert Jackson’s review into the high cost of civil litigation should apply to large-scale commercial disputes.”

Full story

Legal Week, 26th March 2009

Source: www.legalweek.com

Regina v Balshaw – WLR Daily

Posted March 20th, 2009 in costs, law reports, prosecutions by sally

Regina v Balshaw [2009] EWCA Crim 470; [2009] WLR (D) 102

Where a person was convicted of an offence before the Crown Court, and was ordered to pay costs to the prosecutor, there was no principle that the order was proscribed where the costs were designed to compensate a third party.”

WLR Daily, 18th March 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in once of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

R (Perinpanathan) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court – WLR Daily

Posted March 13th, 2009 in costs, forfeiture, law reports, magistrates by sally

R (Perinpanathan) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court; [2009] WLR (D) 92

In exercising its power under s 64(1) Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 to make ‘such order as to costs … as it thinks just and reasonable’ a magistrates’ court was entitled, when dismissing forfeiture proceedings, to take into account its view that the application had reasonably been made.”

WLR Daily, 12th March 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Controlling costs in defamation proceedings – Ministry of Justice

Posted February 25th, 2009 in costs, defamation, news by sally

“New proposals to control costs in defamation proceedings were announced by Justice Minister Bridget Prentice today.”

Full story

Ministry of Justice, 24th February 2009

Source: www.justice.gov.uk

Government to cap legal bills in libel cases – The Times

Posted February 24th, 2009 in costs, defamation, news by sally

“Plans to cap what can be multi-million pound legal fees incurred in fighting libel cases were outlined by the Government today after pressure from media groups.”

Full story

The Times, 24th February 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Civil Procedure Rules: Cost Capping Orders Response Paper – Ministry of Justice

Posted February 23rd, 2009 in civil procedure rules, costs, costs capping orders, news by sally

“A consultation being conducted on behalf of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee on proposals to amend part 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules by inserting rules on costs capping orders. The consultation also proposes amendments to the Costs Practice Direction to provide guidance on costs capping. The proposals are drawn from current case law and so do not propose new policy.”

Full story

Ministry of Justice, 23rd February 2009

Source: www.justice.gov.uk

Jones v Attrill – Times Law Reports

Posted January 16th, 2009 in costs, fees, law reports, personal injuries, solicitors by sally

Jones v Attrill

Court of Appeal

“A solicitor was required to notify his client if he had an interest in recommending a particular insurance policy covering conditional fee agreements, if a reasonable person, knowing the relevant facts, would think that that interest might affect the advice the solicitor gave to his client.”

The Times, 16th January 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Fees scheme may defuse VHCC row – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted January 9th, 2009 in costs, fees, legal profession, news by sally

“A breakthrough in the dispute threatening to disrupt trials of very high cost criminal cases (VHCCs) could be in sight following the publication of new funding proposals.”

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette,  8th January 2009

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

C v W – WLR Daily

Posted January 8th, 2009 in costs, fees, law reports, solicitors by sally

C v W [2008] EWCA Civ 1459; WLR (D) 4

“There was nothing unreasonable in a simple conditional fee agreement entered into between a claimant and her solicitor when liability had already been admitted by the defendant in the proceedings provided that the parties had made a proper assessment of the inevitably much reduced risk of failure.”

WLR Daily, 7th January 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Jones v Attrill; Hibberd v Michael Jane Hair & Beauty; Tankard v John Fredericks Plastics Ltd (Law Society intervening) – WLR daily

Posted December 16th, 2008 in costs, fees, law reports, personal injuries, solicitors by sally

Jones v Attrill; Hibberd v Michael Jane Hair & Beauty; Tankard v John Fredericks Plastics Ltd (Law Society intervening)[2008] EWCA Civ 1375; [2008] WLR (D) 383

The purpose of reg 4(2)(e)(ii) of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations 2000 was to ensure that a solicitor acted and gave advice independently of his own interest. To determine whether, for the purposes of that regulation, a solicitor had an interest in recommending a particular insurance contract to his client, the test was whether a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts would think that the existence of the interest might affect the advice given by the solicitor to his client, and if so, the interest should be disclosed.”

WLR Daily, 15th December 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Setback for small businesses under new VAT dispute rules – The Times

Posted December 9th, 2008 in costs, news, VAT by sally

“Small businesses already struggling because of the economic downturn are facing a further setback under new rules that will prevent them from recovering their costs in VAT disputes with the taxman.”

Full story

The Times, 8th December 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Browne: costs pose threat to legal representation – The Lawyer

Posted December 8th, 2008 in costs, legal aid, news by sally

“The increasing cost of legal action and the curbing of public funding could threaten the quality of legal representation, in-coming Bar Council chair Desmond Browne QC has warned.”

Full story

The Lawyer, 8th December 2008

Source: www.thelawyer.com

Defendants should not have to pay for being wrongly prosecuted – discuss – The Times

Posted November 25th, 2008 in costs, legal aid, news, prosecutions by sally

“Should the taxpayer foot the legal bills of defendants who are brought before courts and acquitted?”

Full story

The Times, 25th November 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Regina (Buglife – The Invertebrate Conservation Trust) v Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corporation – The Times

Posted November 18th, 2008 in fees, judicial review, law reports, protective costs orders by sally

Regina (Buglife – The Invertebrate Conservation Trust) v Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corporation

Court of Appeal

“Where a party with limited means applied for a protective costs order to bring a matter of public importance before the court, and that party was represented by means of a conditional fee agreement, the agreed success fee was relevant to the amount of the cap on the costs order and consequently was to be disclosed to the court.”

The Times, 18th November 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Appeal judge hits out at “deeply troubling” £100,000 legal costs over a £265 dispute – Daily Telegraph

Posted November 14th, 2008 in costs, news by sally

“Lawyers ran up legal bills worth £100,000 and spent more than nine days of court time settling a row over £265.”

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 13th November 2008

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Are high costs failing those looking for justice? – The Times

Posted November 13th, 2008 in costs, fees, news, special report by sally

“The fundamental review of costs of litigation in the civil courts set up under Lord Justice Jackson was described as the biggest thing since the Woolf report, at the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) costs forum last month — which is appropriate, given that high costs are a particular failure of the former Lord Chief Justice’s reforms.”

Full story

The Times, 13th November 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

R (Buglife — The Invertebrate Conservation Trust) v Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corpn – WLR Daily

Posted November 11th, 2008 in fees, judicial review, law reports, protective costs orders by sally

R (Buglife — The Invertebrate Conservation Trust) v Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corpn [2008] EWCA Civ 1209; [2008] WLR (D) 348

On an application for a protective costs order the principles set out in the authorities were to be applied and the procedure followed in a flexible way, taking into account the circumstances of the particular case. The costs in general should be relatively modest and were likely to be capped. In deciding the amount of any cap on liability the agreed success fee for a conditional fee agreement was relevant and as a result was to be disclosed to the court.”

 

WLR Daily, 10th November 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.