‘A litigant in person who “abruptly” walked out of a detailed assessment hearing before the end of the first day and failed to return, has been ordered to pay £82,930 by an employment judge.’
Litigation Futures, 4th September 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A judge told shoplifter: “I didn’t know that people who were on benefits were into Champagne?”‘
Daily Telegraph, 4th September 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A former MP who was falsely accused of child sex abuse in a recent inquiry has demanded assurances that his accuser will not receive special legal status.’
BBC News, 30th August 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘An environmental campaigner who was deceived into forming a long-term intimate relationship with a police spy is refusing to pay Scotland Yard a £7,000 legal bill incurred during her quest for the truth.’
The Guardian, 28th August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Freedom of Information requests have exposed how taxpayers’ money has been spent on futile legal battles to prevent vulnerable people receiving help.’
The Independent, 29th August 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘What happens when your FOIA request to a public authority is met with the response that it would breach the cost limits set under section 12 to respond to the request because the authority’s record keeping systems are in a particular (i.e. poor) state? In a word: tough.’
Panopticon, 24th August 2017
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘A costs judge has rejected a defendant’s attempt to deprive a clinical negligence claimant of their £10,000 insurance premium.’
Law Society's Gazette, 24th August 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Lord Justice Jackson has tabled plans for extending fixed recoverable costs. He conceded that fixing it would not be possible without reform to procedures.’
4KBW, 4th August 2017
Source: www.4kbw.net
‘The case concerned a claim by over 600 Turkish passengers against two airlines for failing to honour flights that they had booked to Cyprus. Legal advice was obtained and a meeting with solicitors was arranged by a committee at a local community centre, where CFAs were signed.’
Park Square Barristers, 7th August 2017
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘As long ago as 1974 a benevolent approach to the assessment of the merits of a case was adopted in the Employment Tribunal (ET). Sir High Griffiths sitting in the NIRC, when addressing an application for costs, stated the following:
“Ordinary experience of life frequently teaches us that that which is plain for all to see once the dust of battle has subsided was far from clear to the combatants when they took up arms. We do not therefore attach undue weight to the fact that at the end of a skilful cross-examination on the last day of the hearing the employee was forced to concede that in the circumstances as they had emerged the employers had acted reasonably in dismissing him.”
(E. T. Marler Ltd v Robertson [1974] ICR 72.)’
Littleton Chambers, 25th July 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Coroners have no power to award costs of legal advice or representation at inquests. Where a successful civil claim follows, parties will naturally wish to recover the costs of the inquests as well as the costs of the civil proceedings from the losing party. The starting point is Section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 which enables the court to award costs “of and incidental to” civil proceedings.’
Park Square Barristers, 10th August 2017
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘The amount of a costs order in the employment tribunal (ET) can be made subject to detailed assessment, to be carried out (either by the ET or by a county court) in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) (rule 78, ET Rules). It was traditionally understood that this application of the CPR to ET procedure was limited to the assessment of the level of costs, as opposed to the separate question of whether costs should be ordered at all. As reflected in the CPR, “costs follow the event” in the civil courts. In contrast, the ET has a limited costs jurisdiction, which depends on the existence of improper or unreasonable conduct and the exercise of discretion in the presence of such conduct as to whether to award costs.’
Littleton Chambers, 24th July 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘A lettings agency has been ordered to pay more than £20,000 in fines, compensation and costs after issuing ‘sham licences’ to renters and using a letting agency association logo when it was not a member, in what is thought to be the first prosecution of its kind in England.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st August 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The High Court has approved an increase to defendants’ costs budget against the opposition of the claimants, a rare reported example of an application for variation.’
Litigation Futures, 17th August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘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
‘The Court of Appeal has backed the order of indemnity costs against a retired couple involved in a battle over access to gas and electricity meters, who “had not come to court to assist the court in resolving the dispute but to assist themselves”.’
Litigation Futures, 15th August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A regional costs judge has ruled in favour of claimants in the latest hearing to consider the issue of fixed costs for interim applications.’
Law Society's Gazette, 11th August 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court has ordered well-known Formula 1 personality Eddie Jordan to pay indemnity costs after he accepted a “very historic” £15,000 part 36 offer that was still open on the eve of trial – and which was £85,000 less than he had been offered a year earlier.’
Litigation Futures, 10th August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Court of Appeal has rejected a law firm’s claim to its legal fees in a battle with a liquidator over a conditional fee agreement (CFA).’
Litigation Futures, 8th August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Claimants cannot “blow hot and cold” with qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) by terminating one conditional fee agreement (CFA) and signing a new one just to get the benefit of costs protection, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 3rd August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025