‘A law firm has been ordered to pay wasted costs of £7,920 for not satisfying itself that the director of a company in deadlock with the other director had the authority to give it instructions.’
Legal Futures, 5th July 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Judges have the power to direct cross-examination of a lawyer against whom a wasted costs order is sought, but it should be “very much the exception”, the Court of Appeal said yesterday.’
Legal Futures, 12th November 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has opted against making a wasted costs order against global firm Baker McKenzie following an application from their litigation opponents.’
Law Society's Gazette, 12th October 2021
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court has upheld a decision not to order wasted costs against a law firm that failed to pass on a “drop hands” settlement offer to a client who was ultimately found to be fundamentally dishonest.’
Litigation Futures, 30th September 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The First-tier Tribunal has refused to grant HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) a wasted costs order despite its opponents instructing their QC on the wrong issue.’
Litigation Futures, 23rd July 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Employment tribunals should generally give the benefit of doubt to a legal representative facing a wasted costs applications where their client refuses to waive privilege, the president of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has decided.’
Litigation Futures, 31st August 2018
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Jacobs UK Ltd v Skanska Construction UK Ltd was a dispute all about the adequacy of Jacobs’ design services, which related to street lighting in Lewisham and Croydon. It highlights some interesting issues related to whether a party is entitled to withdraw from an adjudication and then start again.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog , 17th October 2017
‘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
‘Costs orders: who pays & when, asks Kerry Underwood.’
New Law Journal, 20th October 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Wasted costs orders can only be made against a representative, whereas non-party costs orders can be made against anyone, including a representative.’
New Law Journal, 20th October 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Anecdotal evidence suggests that Defendants in failed personal injury claims are increasingly making use of the Court’s wasted costs powers in an attempt to recover costs from Claimants’ legal representatives. Often this is in cases where the Defence is either explicitly or implicitly one of fraud. In such cases the terms of the ATE insurance (if indeed any is held by the Claimant) are often such that the policy does not pay out. Thus, Defendants are sometimes left in the position of holding a costs order against a ‘man of straw’. To circumvent this problem it seems some Defendants are making costs applications against legal representatives directly, using the wasted costs jurisdiction. The recent case of Kagalovsky v Balmore Invest Ltd [2015] EWHC 1337 (QB)[1] provides a salutary reminder of the difficulties a party faces when seeking to persuade a Court to make a wasted costs order.’
Zenith PI Blog, 20th May 2015
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘The High Court has ruled that when long-running employment tribunal hearing collapsed as the result of the judge’s recusal due to apparent bias the claimants in the action could not obtain damages for wasted costs under section 6 of the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998 (specifically Article 6, the right to a fair trial) or the EU Charter.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 25th February 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Judges making wasted costs orders (WCOs) are to be placed under a duty to report the lawyers involved to their regulator in a bid to make them “consider more carefully the decisions they make in handling a case”, the government has decided.’
Litigation Futures, 6th February 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
“The Court of Appeal has taken the highly unusual step of ruling that a judge should have recused himself from hearing a wasted costs order against a party’s solicitors given the comments he made about them in his substantive judgment.”
Litigation Futures, 27th August 2013
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
“In HB, PB, and OB –v- London Borough of Croydon [2013] EWHC 1956 (Fam) Cobb J had to consider whether or not to make an order that a Local Authority which had been directed to file a section 37 report, and whose failure to do so properly had led to wasted costs, should pay those wasted costs of aborted days of hearing. The power to make such a costs order was in the discretion of the court (Senior Courts Act 1981 s51(1)) and, by reference to FPR 2010 28.1, the court could make such order as it thought just. The Local Authority was sufficiently closed connected with the litigation, and its failings were so serious, as to justify making what the court was urged to regard as an exceptional order.”
Sovereign Chambers, 19th July 2013
Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2023