‘The High Court has rejected a challenge to the Ministry of Justice’s (MoJ) failure to extend qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) to discrimination claims in the county court.’
Litigation Futures, 20th February 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Points of dispute (PoDs) in detailed assessments must help the parties and court “determine precisely what is in dispute and why”, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 20th February 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘This decision is important for any professional involved in solicitor and client disputes. The judgment is another example of the senior courts being willing to uphold robust case management decisions of first instance judges. Here the court held that “the judge was entitled to take the course he did which was well within the ambit of the proper exercise of his discretion.”’
Hardwicke Chambers, 19th February 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘An urgently needed amendment to the rules on qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) in so-called mixed claims will come into force in the coming weeks, the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) has decided.’
Litigation Futures, 18th February 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Following the decision in I v Hull & East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust (25 February 2019), applications for a further interim payment on account of costs have become common in high-value clinical negligence and personal injury claims where there is likely to be substantial delay before quantum can be determined by the court. In the recent decision in RXK v Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2751 (QB), Master Cook observed that there was no decision of the High Court on the principle of whether such applications are well founded and have an adequate judicial basis in the rules and/or the authorities. Thus, the master took the opportunity in RXK to provide guidance ‘in the hope that such applications would be better prepared in future’.’
Law Society's Gazette, 17th February 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Parties that try to use the disclosure pilot for litigation advantage will face “serious adverse costs consequences”, the Chancellor of the High Court has warned, urging judges to take action if they see it.’
Litigation Futures, 17th February 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The appellant is the great-aunt of J, a child who was the focus of care proceedings that began in 2017. J’s mother accepted early on that she could not care for him and the proceedings focused on assessment of his great-aunt instead. Throughout the care proceedings the great-aunt was unrepresented (and for most of it, not a party). She is a formidable woman.’
Transparency Project, 13th February 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘A circuit judge has made a “highly unusual” and large third-party costs order against a claimant’s medical expert witness, whose “improper, unreasonable, or negligent conduct” doomed the case.
Litigation Futures, 14th February 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In a fixed costs RTA claim for credit hire, D alleged that C had failed to comply with an Unless Order to provide specific disclosure, and applied to strike out the claim.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 5th February 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has ordered a local authority to make a contribution of £12,000 towards the costs of a great-aunt who won an appeal from care and placement orders made by a judge at the conclusion of proceedings concerning a two-year-old boy, J.’
Local Government Lawyer, 10th February 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Costs specialists PJ Kirby QC and Robin Dunne look back at some important cases of 2019 and consider what issues will arise in the world of costs in 2020.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 29th January 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Qualified one-way costs shifting should be extended to people pursuing claims under the Equality Act, the High Court heard last week.’
Litigation Futures, 3rd February 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Are all conditional fee agreements also contentious business agreements? And, if so, how might that effect a client’s right to an assessment of the costs charged by her solicitor under the Solicitors Act 1974?’
Ropewalk Chambers, 23rd January 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘There are “strong public policy grounds” for allowing fee-exempt claimants to claim their court fees from defendants rather than the taxpayer, a judge has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 28th January 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The NHS in England faces paying out £4.3bn in legal fees to settle outstanding claims of clinical negligence, the BBC has learned through a Freedom of Information request.’
BBC News, 21st January 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The facts of the case were straightforward. The Claimant was riding his motorcycle along a road for which the Local Authority were responsible when he fell and injured himself as a result of a pothole. A claim was brought against the Local Authority. Liability was denied, but after proceedings were served the case settled for a sum of £800.’
Guildhall Chambers, 17th January 2020
Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
‘It is not possible to make a valid Part 36 offer exclusive of interest either generally or in the context of detailed assessment proceedings, the Court of Appeal has ruled in a case involving a local authority.’
Local Government Lawyer, 20th January 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The First Claimant (“the Owner”) owned a marine vessel damaged by fire at sea. It brought an insurance claim against the Defendants (“the Underwriters”). The Second Claimant, the mortgagee of the vessel (“the Bank”), claimed an indemnity against the Underwriters pursuant to an insurance policy for the constructive total loss of the vessel by piracy.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 8th January 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘A solicitor who acted where there was a real conflict of interest and paid out almost £6m from buyer clients before they had obtained any security in the flats they were hoping to buy, has been fined for misconduct.’
Legal Futures, 14th January 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The High Court has characterised a liquidator’s firm as a real party to the litigation which it funded as it stood to make financial gain from the action and was therefore found not to be a pure funder facilitating access to justice.’
OUT-LAW.com, 10th January 2020
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
© Inner Temple Library 2022