Tag: Costs

Ashford Hotels Ltd v Higgins and Others: CA 14 Aug 1995

An order for Security for costs was possible even where the trial may yet proceed in a foreign jurisdiction. Even though the court had jurisdiction over the defendants, a court could stay an action to allow an action to proceed abroad if that would be more appropriate.

Citations:

Ind Summary 14-Aug-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.77894

Pitchmastic Plc v Birse Construction Ltd: QBD 8 Jun 2000

A party to litigation made an offer on the day before trial of settlement without prejudice save as to costs. At trial it made an open offer in similar terms which was rejected. After reading a draft unfavourable judgment, the party applied to be allowed to accept the offer, contending that such an offer was to remain open for 21 days in any event. The rules allowed a party to withdraw such an offer, and such situations must be decided by ordinary rules of offer and acceptance. The rules which apply to acceptance of a payment in do not necessarily apply to offers to settle. There is no rule requiring the permission of the court before allowing the withdrawal of an offer of settlement, and the test for whether such an offer remained capable of acceptance was the normal one of offer and acceptance.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Jun-2000, Times 21-Jun-2000

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules Part 36

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Costs, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.84743

Easyair Ltd (T/A Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd: ChD 8 Apr 2009

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 779 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Easyair Ltd (T/A Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd ChD 2-Mar-2009
Principles Applicable on Summary Judgment Request
The court considered an application for summary judgment.
Held: Lewison J set out the principles: ‘the court must be careful before giving summary judgment on a claim. The correct approach on applications by defendants is, in my judgment, as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.573626

Kenneth L Kellar Carib West Limited v Stanley A Williams: PC 24 Jun 2004

(Turks and Caicos Islands) The appellant had failed in his action but argued that he should not be called upon to pay the costs of the respondent because there had been an unlawful conditional fee agreement. The bill had referred to one factor as the degree of success in the case, and the respondent argued that this showed the existence of a conditional fee element.
Held: The letter relied upon did not establish what was suggested, and nor could the fact that the remuneration rate had not been formally agreed in advance. It was not unlawful as a conditional fee arrangement. The case was remitted for taxation to proceed.
The Privy Council expressed the view that ‘it may now be time to reconsider the accepted prohibition in the light of modern practising conditions.’

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Carswell, Dame Sian Elias

Citations:

[2004] UKPC 30, [2005] 4 Costs LR 559, (2004) 148 SJLB 821

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Way v Latilla HL 1937
Mr Way (W), the plaintiff, was employed by Ariston, which had mining operations in Africa, as a consulting engineer and manager. He met the respondent (L) in England. He was asked to seek options to acquire concessions the respondent might acquire. . .
Cited – Thai Trading (a Firm) v Taylor and Taylor (of Taylors Solicitors, Caversham) CA 27-Feb-1998
A solicitor had agreed with his wife to act for her in litigation on the understanding that he would only recover his profit costs if she succeeded.
Held: This agreement did not offend public policy. This type of agreement was distinguished . .
Cited – Hazlett v Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council QBD 2-Dec-1999
The need for a party claiming his costs to give evidence to prove his entitlement to costs rather than relying on the presumption in his favour, will not arise if the defendant simply puts the complainant to proof of his entitlement to costs. The . .
See also – Kellar v Williams PC 7-Feb-2000
PC (Turks and Caicos Islands) The parties disputed whether sums paid to the company had been by way of loan or as capital contributions which after payment of debts were distributable among the shareholders.
Cited – Geraghty and Co v Awwad and Another CA 25-Nov-1999
The court considered an assertion that a contract for fee sharing with a solicitors firm was unenforceable being in breach of the Solicitors Practice Rules.
Held: The court refused to follow Thai Trading. There should no longer be any common . .

Cited by:

See Also – Kellar v Williams PC 7-Feb-2000
PC (Turks and Caicos Islands) The parties disputed whether sums paid to the company had been by way of loan or as capital contributions which after payment of debts were distributable among the shareholders.
Cited – Sibthorpe and Morris v London Borough of Southwark CA 25-Jan-2011
The court was asked as to the extent to which the ancient rule against champerty prevents a solicitor agreeing to indemnify his claimant client against any liability for costs which she may incur against the defendant in the litigation in which the . .
Cited – Patel, Re Defendant’s Cost Order CACD 6-Jul-2012
The defendant had been granted a defendant costs order, but he had not complied with the Rules by first outlining the type of costs and amount claimed’ and the Court had not required compliance. He had successfully appealed against a conviction for . .
Cited – Radford and Another v Frade and Others QBD 8-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to the terms on which solicitors and Counsel were retained to act for the defendants. The appeals did not raise any issues concerning costs practice, and were by way of review of the Costs Judge’s rulings, and not by way of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.198381

Boehringer Ingelheim and others v Vetplus Ltd: CA 5 Jul 2007

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 661

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd and others v Vetplus Ltd CA 20-Jun-2007
The claimants appealed refusal of an order restricting comparative advertising materials for the defendant’s competing veterinary medicine. The claimant said that the rule against prior restraint applicable to defamation and other tort proceedings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.254460

EMW Law Llp v Halborg: ChD 22 May 2015

Judges:

Purle QC HHJ

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 2005 (Ch), 2015] 4 Costs LO 427

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – EMW Law Llp v Halborg ChD 14-Oct-2016
The claimant solicitors had been instructed under a conditional fee agreement, to act in litigation for the defendant solicitor, himself acting for his parents and a company owned by him. Though the case was one the defendant in the case refused to . .
See Also – EMW Law Llp v Halborg ChD 4-May-2017
The defendant appealed from a decision requiring him to disclose documents which he said were held on a without prejudice basis. Mr Halborg, a solicitor, acted for his parents and a family company under a conditional fee agreement on their claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.550336

Levy v Legal Aid Board: ChD 24 Feb 2000

Although an order for costs might in some circumstances not be provable in an insolvency, that did not prevent a statutory demand based upon that debt. Whether it was provable would become clear in the later insolvency proceedings. The court had a discretion to found a petition on an unproveable debt where there were special circumstances such as, for example other debts which were provable.

Citations:

Gazette 24-Feb-2000, Gazette 16-Mar-2000

Statutes:

Insolvency Rules 1986/1925 12 3 (2) (a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid, Insolvency

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.83037

Macinnes v Gross: QBD 3 Feb 2017

Application of costs budget

Judges:

Coulson J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 127 (QB), [2017] 4 WLR 49, [2017] WLR(D) 83, [2017] 2 Costs LR 243

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – DSN v Blackpool Football Club Ltd QBD 20-Mar-2020
Indemnity costs award on ADR refusal
The claimant succeeded in his claim for damages for historic sexual abuse, and recovered more than his rejected offer for settlement. He now claimed his costs on an indemnity basis.
Held: ‘It is correct that an order for indemnity costs means . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 20 November 2022; Ref: scu.573861

Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others: ChD 1 May 2013

Judgment on wasted costs after findings critical of an expert witness.

Judges:

Peter Smith J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1087 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others (Experts) ChD 22-Mar-2013
Consideration of the protocol for the instruction of experts . .
See Also – Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others (Jurisdiction) ChD 22-Mar-2013
The case was broght in respect of a foundation in Ethiopia; the parties were alll Ethiopian, the assets and the law. The defendants disputed that the English court had jurisdiction. . .
See Also – Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others ChD 25-Mar-2013
Application for leave to appeal – refused. . .
See Also – Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others ChD 26-Mar-2013
The defendants were seeking an order for wasted costs against the solicitors for the claimants. The claimants had requested the judge to recuse himself from hearing that complaint. He now gave his reasons for refusing that request. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others CA 14-Aug-2013
The solicitors appealed against the making of a wasted costs order against them. . .
See Also – Mengiste and Another v Endowment Fund for The Rehabilitation of Tigray and Others ChD 11-Dec-2014
The Claimants asserted that judgments in Ethiopia were obtained by perjury and fraudulent means in particular by the deliberate withholding of material evidence. They also claimed that the Ethiopian Courts were biased against them. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 20 November 2022; Ref: scu.491844

Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (In Receivership) v Koshy and Others (No 2): ChD 30 Mar 2000

The new Civil Procedure Rules had not substantially affected the rules on costs following the event of a trial. The discretion in a judge as to the order for costs had been correctly stated in Elgindata, and approved in Phonographic Performance Ltd v AEI Rediffusion Music Ltd.

Citations:

Times 30-Mar-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (In Receivership) v Koshy and Others ChD 8-Feb-2000
A company could give several people the power to appoint a receiver in respect of different elements of its assets. If this was done there was no fundamental reason why such appointments should not be put in effect. The appointment of one receiver . .
See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy and Another CA 25-Jul-2001
Application to amend order under slip rule. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Amber v Stacey CA 15-Nov-2000
The defendant challenged an order that he should pay the plaintiff’s costs, having made an offer in correspondence which was not accepted.
Held: The claimant had exaggerated his claim, but the defendant’s offer had been inadequate. The judge’s . .
See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (In Receivership) v Koshy and Others ChD 8-Feb-2000
A company could give several people the power to appoint a receiver in respect of different elements of its assets. If this was done there was no fundamental reason why such appointments should not be put in effect. The appointment of one receiver . .
See Also – Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy and Another CA 25-Jul-2001
Application to amend order under slip rule. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.81097

Russell v Van Overwaele: SCSF 2 Mar 2005

‘The Sheriff Principal having resumed consideration of the cause Refuses the appeal and Adheres to the interlocutor of the sheriff dated 4 September 2003; Certifies the appeal as suitable for the employment of junior counsel; Finds the defender and appellant liable to the pursuer and respondent in the expenses of the appeal procedure; Allows an account thereof to be given in and Remits same when lodged to the auditor of court to tax and to report thereon; thereafter Remits to the sheriff to proceed as accords.’

Judges:

Sheriff Principal B A Kerr

Citations:

[2005] ScotSC 15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

See Also – Van Overwaele v Hacking and Paterson for Recall of an Award of Sequestration SCS 8-Aug-2001
. .
See Also – Van Overwaele v Hacking and Paterson and Another ScS 22-Apr-2004
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Van Overwaele, Re Interdict SCS 10-Dec-2009
Petition for interdict in which the petitioner for the most part has been a party litigant. The petition arises out of the sequestration of the petitioner in January 2000 and she seeks to interdict the respondent, the permanent trustee, from seizing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.224672

Trustees of Olympic Airlines Sa Pension and Life Assurance Scheme v Olympic Airlines Sa: CA 25 Feb 2013

Application for security for costs of appeal agaiinst winding up order.

Judges:

Kitchin LJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 218

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Security for costs – Olympic Airlines Sa Pension and Life Insurance Scheme v Olympic Airlines Sa CA 6-Jun-2013
The court considered the the jurisdiction under EU law to commence a secondary winding-up in England of a company whose main liquidation is taking place in Greece. That depended upon whether the company, registered in Greece had a sufficient . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Insolvency

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.472024

Ager v Ager: CA 19 Dec 1997

An order of the Court of Appeal that an order for costs was not to be enforced without the leave of the court could be dealt with by leave of the first instance court. It did not have to go back to the Court of Appeal.

Citations:

Times 06-Jan-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 3053, [1998] 1 All ER 703, [1998] 1 WLR 1074

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.77667

Cummings and Others v The Ministry of Justice: QBD 22 Jan 2013

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 48 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Principal judgment – Cummings and Others v The Ministry of Justice QBD 17-Jan-2013
The claimant prisoners brought actions seeking damages for assault and other torts. They had complained of racist treatment and of the conditions of their segregation. The court now considered applications for the management of the case.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470493

Ross River Ltd and Another v Waverly Commercial Ltd and Another: ChD 9 Oct 2012

Judges:

Morgan J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3006 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Ross River Ltd and Another v Waveley Commercial Ltd and Others ChD 25-Jan-2012
The parties disputed the content and effect of a joint venture agreement. . .
See Also – Ross River Ltd and Another v Waveley Commercial Ltd and Others ChD 6-Sep-2012
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Ross River Ltd and Another v Waveley Commercial Ltd and Others CA 29-Jul-2013
Breach of fiduciary duty in development contract . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Costs

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465529

L v L (Costs: Legal Aid Taxation): CA 26 Jan 1996

Solicitors hourly rates are not to be artificially reduced by use of averages. The judge had placed too much weight on artificially low average hourly rates.
Neill LJ considered recent cases and set out five propositions to be applied by the taxing officer: (1) the general principle of taxation is that a solicitor’s remuneration should consist of two elements – first a sum computed on the basis of an hourly rate which represents what is called the ‘broad average direct cost’ of undertaking the work; and secondly, a sum, usually expressed as a percentage mark-up of the broad average direct cost for care and conduct:
(2) the broad average direct cost is to be assessed by reference to an average firm in the relevant area at the relevant time:
(3) the relevant time means the time at which the work was done. No allowance should be made for the consequences of later inflation:
(4) the District Judge can draw on his own experience and on information which is provided to him by local firms; the District Judge can also take account of surveys.
(5) an artificially inflated figure for uplift should not be used to correct or compensate for inadequate hourly rates: accordingly the appropriate hourly rates should be the rates which ‘represented the actual cost to the solicitor at the relevant time doing the relevant work (assuming always that the solicitor has acted reasonably and the costs are incurred at the appropriate level).
He added two qualifications. First that the words of Order 62 Rule 12(1) contain the key test ‘a reasonable amount in respect of all costs reasonably incurred’ and, second that ‘I would also wish to leave open the question, which does not arise in this case, as to whether it is always correct to consider only firms in the relevant area. There may cases where it might be arguable that though the costs were reasonable for the solicitor instructed, it was not reasonable to instruct a solicitor practising in an expensive inner city area rather than one practising, for example, in a suburb.’
Aldous LJ said: ‘The task of the taxing officer under Order 62 Rule 12 is to allow ‘a reasonable amount in respect of all costs reasonably incurred’. That requires two decisions. First, whether costs were reasonably incurred and secondly – what is the reasonable amount that should be allowed? We are not concerned with the first matter, as there is no dispute before us as to whether any particular work carried out should or should not have been carried out nor whether it should have been carried out by a partner or some other employee. The only issue before us is whether the reasonable amount should be calculated using as the Part A figure pounds 45 per hour for a partner and pounds 30 per hour for a legal executive . . The reasonable amount is not necessarily the amount that a solicitor charges, but is the reasonable amount that a party ordered to pay costs should pay. Thus the expense rate of certain solicitors may be totally irrelevant as their overheads and therefore their expense rate far exceeds that which other solicitors doing the relevant work would charge. A party ordered to pay costs should not be liable for the particular choice of solicitor of the winning party, but should pay the reasonable costs of the sort of solicitor that a person would have instructed with a view of the proper conduct of his case and minimising the costs of the litigation.’

Judges:

Aldous LJ, Neill LJ

Citations:

Gazette 28-Feb-1996, Times 26-Jan-1996, [1996] 1 FLR 873

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – O’Beirne v Hudson CA 9-Feb-2010
The matter had been settled by a consent order providing for costs on a standard basis, however the costs judge had decided that the matter would if it had proceeded, have been allocated to the small claims track, and therefore limited his costs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.82885

SG v Hewitt: CA 2 Aug 2012

The claimant child was substantially injured at the negligence of the defendant. A pre-action offer of settlement was later made and, two years later, accepted. The parties now disputed liability for costs.

Judges:

Pill, Arden, Black LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1053

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463426

AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 31 Jul 2012

Judges:

Nicola Davies DBE J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2224 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Principal judgment – AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 25-Jul-2012
The claimant child sought damages and an injunction from and against the defendant newspapers, alleging harassment and breach of her privacy. At times there had been as many as ten reporters encamped outside her house. . .

Cited by:

First Instance Costs – AAA v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 20-May-2013
An order had been sought for the claimant child for damages after publication by the defendant of details of her identity and that of her politician father. She now appealed against refusal of her claim for damages for publication of private . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463323

Kawarindrasingh v White: CA 13 Dec 1996

A judge who was reviewing the taxation of a litigant in person’s bill of costs, has the powers of taxing officer. He was not limited to changing the taxing officer’s decision if it was Wednesbury unreasonable. He had his own discretion.

Citations:

Times 19-Dec-1996, Gazette 13-Dec-1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.82688

Cantana v HMRC: UTTC 25 May 2012

COSTS – appeal in standard category before First-tier Tribunal – appeal compromised on day of hearing – direction in favour of appellant in respect of costs refused – whether refusal incorrect exercise of discretion – no – appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 172 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.462877

Deg-Deutsche Investitions Und Entwicklungsgesellschaft Mbh v Koshy and Others: ChD 13 Jan 2000

Once a legal aid certificate is revoked the party is deemed by statute never to have had the benefit of a legal aid certificate. The rules relating to assessment of costs which applied when a party had legal aid did not therefore apply. An order however which has once been made cannot be varied subsequently by reference to those rules, even if the order was made in the light of them.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-2000, Gazette 13-Jan-2000

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 130, Civil Procedure Rules Part 3.1(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Costs, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.79884

F and C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd and Others v Barthelemy and Another: CA 22 Jun 2012

The parties, former partners in a limited liability partnership providing investment funds management, had been involved in protracted and bitter litigation. The appellant now challenged the award of indemnity costs.

Judges:

Arden, Tomlinson, Davis LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 843, [2012] WLR (D) 183, [2013] Bus LR 186, [2013] 1 Costs LR 35, [2013] 1 WLR 548, [2012] 4 All ER 1096

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – F and C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy and Another ChD 14-Jul-2011
The parties applied to the court for a conclusion to their action without the draft judgment being handed down and published, they having reached agreement.
Held: It was within the judge’s discretion and in this in the public interest for the . .
See Also – F and C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy and Another (No 2) ChD 14-Jul-2011
The court was asked as to the fiduciary obligations owed by members of the board of a limited liability company.
Held: Sales J said that: ‘there is nothing in the Act to qualify the usual fiduciary obligations which an agent owes his principal . .
See Also – F and C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy and Another ChD 28-Oct-2011
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 27-Nov-2013
(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460565

Fisher Meredith Llp v JH and Another: FD 2 Mar 2012

The solicitors appealed against a wasted costs order made against them when acting for W in financial remedy proceedings, being found to be responsible for the late adjournment of a five days remedy hering.

Judges:

Mostyn J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 408 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460521

Daniels v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 23 May 1996

Costs award above scale correct after assessment relative to scale.
The County Court costs scales are to be considered when departing from the scale. An award above scale rates may be correct after an assessment relative to the scale.

Citations:

Times 18-Oct-1996, Gazette 17-Jul-1996

Statutes:

County Court Rules 1981 38(9)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.79796

Fitzgerald and Others v Williams and Others O’Regan and Others v Same: CA 3 Jan 1996

Security for costs should not to be granted against an EC National in the absence of some particular difficulty. The Treaty required citizens of other states which were signatories of the convention. The importance of accurate evidence is particularly acute on an application without notice, and the duty of disclosure on such an application was stressed

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR

Citations:

Times 03-Jan-1996, Ind Summary 12-Feb-1996, [1996] 2 WLR 447, [1996] QB 657

Statutes:

EC Treaty Arts 6, 220, Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (OJ 1972 L299/32)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Reconsidered – Porzelack KG v Porzelack (UK) Ltd 1987
When considering an application for security for costs against a litigant resident in the EU, the courts must allow for the new additional scope for enforcement of any judgment under the 1982 Act. In this case, an order for security for costs . .
Reconsidered – De Bry v Fitzgerald CA 1990
A request was made for security for costs in a large sum against a foreign resident party: ‘The more usual course might have been to order security, if security was to be ordered at all, in a relatively small sum in the first place, leaving the . .
Reconsidered – Berkeley Administration Inc v McClelland CA 1990
There is no legally acceptable basis on which the benefit of an undertaking, to which a member of a group of companies is entitled, may be claimed on behalf of the group as a whole. The court discussed who had the benefit of cross undertakings given . .
Applied – Mund and Fester v Hatrex Internationaal Transport ECJ 10-Feb-1994
(Judgment) A presumption against the successful enforcement of a judgment was not valid against an EU member. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Abraham and Another v Thompson and Another CA 24-Jul-1997
The plaintiffs appealed an order that they should disclose who if any had funded their case. The case concerned failed business ventures in Portugal. . .
Cited – Ghafoor and others v Cliff and others ChD 11-Apr-2006
The applicant had obtained revocation of a grant of administration ad colligenda bona in the estate, and having succeeded, now sought costs. The question was whether there had been proper reasons for the application for the grant. The deceased’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, European

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.80580

NFC Properties Ltd v London Borough of Camden: CA 15 Feb 1993

An order relating to the taxation of costs was not itself an order ‘only for costs’ which must be left to the discretion of the judge hearing the application. Accordingly, the court of appeal could grant leave to appeal against the order where this was refused by the judge involved.

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-Feb-1993

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 18(1)(f)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.84288

McDonald and Others v Horn and Others: CA 8 Aug 1994

A court may make a pre-emptive award of costs to pension fund members who wished to sue the trustees. Hoffmann LJ said: ‘if one looks at the economic relationships involved, there does seem to me to be a compelling analogy between a minority shareholder’s action for damages on behalf of the company and an action by a member of a pension fund to compel trustees or others to account to a fund. In both cases a person with a limited interest in a fund, whether a company’s assets or a pension fund, is alleging injury to the fund as a whole and seeking restitution on behalf of the fund. And what distinguishes the shareholder and pension fund member, on the one hand, from the ordinary trust beneficiary, on the other, is that the former have both given consideration for their interests. They are not just recipients of the settlor’s bounty which he, for better or worse, has entrusted to the control of trustees of his choice. The relationship between the parties is a commercial one and the pension fund members are entitled to be satisfied that the fund is being properly administered. Even in a non-contributory scheme, the employer’s payments are not bounty. They are part of the consideration for the services of the employee. Pension funds are such a special form of trust and the analogy between them and companies with shareholders is so much stronger than in the case of ordinary trusts that, in my judgment, that it would do no violence to established authority if we were to apply to them the Wallersteiner v. Moir (No. 2) procedure.’
As to the court’s powers to award costs: ‘The court’s jurisdiction to deal with litigation costs is based upon section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, which, is derived from section 5 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1890.
The background to the Act of 1890 is briefly as follows. In the old courts of common law, costs followed the event. The judge had no discretion. In the Court of Chancery, costs were in the discretion of the court but that discretion was exercised according to certain principles which I shall discuss later. The first Rules of the new Supreme Court of Judicature (enacted in 1875) adopted the Chancery practice.
The discretion conferred by section 51 is by no means untrammelled. It must be exercised in accordance with the rules of court and established principles.’ and ‘In the case of a fund held on trust, therefore, [‘therefore’ is explained by his immediately previous citation of sub rule 2 of order 62, rule 6 of the then Rules of the Supreme Court] the trustee is entitled to his costs out of the fund on an indemnity basis, provided only that he has not acted unreasonably or in substance for his own benefit rather than that of the fund. Trustees are also able to protect themselves against the possibility that they may be held to have acted unreasonably or in their own interest by applying at an early stage for directions as to whether to bring or defend the proceedings. This procedure, sanctioned by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Re Beddoe, Downes v Cottam requires the trustee to make full disclosure of the strengths and weaknesses of his case. Provided that such disclosure has been made, the trustee can have full assurance that he will not personally have to bear his own costs or pay those of anyone else.’

Judges:

Hoffmann LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 08-Aug-1994, Times 10-Aug-1994, [1995] 1 All ER 961, (1994) 144 NLJ 1515, [1995] ICR 685, [1995] 1 CR 685

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 51, Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1890 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – McDonald and Others v Horn and Others ChD 12-Oct-1993
A pre-emptive costs order is possible where Plaintiffs are impecunious but the case is very strong. . .
Cited – Aiden Shipping Co Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (The ‘Vimeira’) HL 1986
Wide Application of Costs Against Third Party
A claim had been made against charterers by the ship owners, and in turn by the charterers against their sub-charterers. Notice of motion were issued after arbitration awards were not accepted. When heard, costs awards were made, which were now . .
Cited – In re Mills’ Estate CA 1886
The Practice Rules conferred a discretion as to costs only in cases in which before the Judicature Acts the courts would have had jurisdiction to make awards of costs. The Act of 1890 was intended to confer such jurisdiction in any case whatever. . .
Cited – In Re Beddoe, Downes v Cottam CA 1893
A trustee had unsuccessfully defended an action against the trust in detinue for the return of deeds. He now sought protection against a costs order. Costs having been awarded against a trustee in proceeding A, the trustee sought to be indemnified . .

Cited by:

Cited – AMP (UK) Plc and Another v Barker and Others ChD 8-Dec-2000
The claimants were interested under a pension scheme. Alterations had been made, which the said had been in error, and they sought rectification to remove a link between early leaver benefits and incapacity benefits. The defendant trustees agreed . .
Cited – Alsop Wilkinson v Neary and Others ChD 4-Nov-1994
The second defendant, a solicitor, had fraudulently taken money from trusts, and paid money into trusts for his own family. It was claimed that the payments were intended to defeat the recovery of the funds. The trustees sought protection on costs . .
Cited – Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
Cited – 3 Individual Present Professional Trustees of 2 Trusts v an Infant Prospective Beneficiary of One Trust and others ChD 25-Jul-2007
The parties challenged under the 198 Act the right of trustees to seek a Beddoe order protecting themselves against an award of costs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83521

Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Corporation (No 2): CA 20 Jan 1994

A successful appeal on a costs award should be backdated to the original order.

Citations:

Gazette 23-Feb-1994, Times 20-Jan-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Disapproved – Nykredit Mortgage Bank Plc v Edward Erdman Group Ltd (No 2) HL 27-Nov-1997
A surveyor’s negligent valuation had led to the plaintiff obtaining what turned out to be inadequate security for his loan. A cause of action against a valuer for his negligent valuation arises when a relevant and measurable loss is first recorded. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.82868

Fozal v Gofur: CA 9 Jul 1993

An order for wasted costs against counsel could only be allowed with respect to acts done after 1 October 1991, with the new rules.

Citations:

Times 09-Jul-1993, Ind Summary 26-Jul-1993, [1993] CA Transcript 680

Statutes:

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990$ 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd CA 26-Jan-1994
Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders
Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs, Legal Professions

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.80655

Brown and Another v Bennett and Others (No 2): ChD 16 Nov 2001

The power to make a wasted costs order did not apply only against advocates in court, and not only against the applicant’s own representatives. The test was as to the causing of additional costs. In this case several barristers had been involved at different stages. The defendants asserted that they should have appreciated that there was no prospect of success in an allegation of fraud. A decision to plead fraud, within the terms of the barristers’ code of conduct, was a matter of professional judgement. An order should be made only if the view reached by counsel that he could plead dishonesty was unreasonable or reckless. In this case also the claimants insisted on retaining their legal privilege, and accordingly the barristers were unable properly to defend their decisions.

Judges:

Justice Neuberger

Citations:

Times 21-Nov-2001, Gazette 10-Jan-2002

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 51

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons and Simmons CA 12-May-1995
Lost chance claim – not mere speculative claim
Solicitors failed to advise the plaintiffs sufficiently in a property transaction. A warranty against liability for a former tenant’s obligations under leases had not been obtained. The trial judge held that, on a balance of probabilities, there was . .
Cited – Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3) HL 22-Mar-2001
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness
The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI.
Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also . .

Cited by:

Distinguished – Byrne v Sefton Health Authority CA 22-Nov-2001
There was no power to make an order for wasted costs against a solicitor who had not been acting in a matter when proceedings were issued. Delays eventually led to the dismissal of a medical negligence case for limitation. The defendant authority . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs, Litigation Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.166845

Appeal Under S 3(c) of Costs In Criminal Cases (General Amendment) Regulations of 1991 Against a Wasted Costs Order Re: Lakha and Boothby Wasted Costs Order 5/97: CACD 6 Nov 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 3148

Statutes:

Costs In Criminal Cases (General) (Amendment) Regulations 1991 3(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Costs, Legal Professions

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.156022

PHI Group Ltd v Robert West Consulting Ltd: CA 10 May 2012

The court considered the application of rule 36, and the general rules as to costs, in relation to contribution proceedings between two parties both liable to a claimant for the same damage.

Judges:

Rix, Lloyd, Stanley Burnton LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 588

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 36

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Civil Procedure Rules, Costs

Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.457605

In Re A Solicitors (Wasted Costs Order) (No 1 of 1994): CACD 27 Jun 1995

A witness answering and resisting a summons is a sufficient party for ‘wasted costs’ order purposes.

Citations:

Times 27-Jun-1995, Gazette 19-Jul-1995

Statutes:

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 111, Costs in Criminal Cases (General) (Amendment) Regulations 1991 (1991 No 789)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.81682

Spencer and Others v Fielder: ChD 15 Jul 2014

Beddoe proceedings by the present trustees of the Airways Pension Scheme for directions of the court in relation to their conduct of proceedings brought against them by British Airways plc.
Held: The Chancellor authorised the Trustee to defend the claim (down to and including the completion of disclosure and inspection) and ordered that the Trustee’s costs be paid out of the Scheme assets

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton CH

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 2768 (Ch), [2015] 1 WLR 2786

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In Re Beddoe, Downes v Cottam CA 1893
A trustee had unsuccessfully defended an action against the trust in detinue for the return of deeds. He now sought protection against a costs order. Costs having been awarded against a trustee in proceeding A, the trustee sought to be indemnified . .

Cited by:

See Also – Airways Pension Scheme Trustee Ltd v Fielder and Another (3032) ChD 11-Nov-2019
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Trusts

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.550161

Sutton, Regina (on The Application of) v Calderdale Council: Admn 21 Mar 2012

The claimant had instituted judicial review proceedings as to his care provided by the repsondent. He then withdrew the request, but now sought his costs, saying that he had achieved everything he sought in the settlement.
Held: No order for costs.

Judges:

Behrens HHJ

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 637 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 06 October 2022; Ref: scu.452387

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and Another: ComC 17 Jun 2008

Application for further order of payment of costs of action on account.

Judges:

Filed J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2221 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd ComC 17-May-2005
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd CA 24-Oct-2005
The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here.
Held: The fact that the defendants were all . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 28-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 14-Mar-2007
Judgment on quantum. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and others ComC 25-May-2007
Application for an order to prevent some defendants pursuing action in other jurisdictions. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 11-Jul-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 20-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 4-Apr-2008
The court was asked whether the Commercial Court had international jurisdiction to make an order for the appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution, and a freezing order, in relation to the judgment debtors’ interest in the concession . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 23-May-2008
Application for interpretation of a receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another (No 3) CA 6-Jun-2008
The court was asked whether the English court has jurisdiction following judgment to grant an anti-suit injunction against foreign judgment debtors (one of whom has a domicile in a Brussels I Regulation State) restraining them from pursuing . .

Cited by:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and others CA 28-Jul-2008
The judgment creditor appealed an order refusing to oblige the defendant company to attend court and provide information about its means. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 21-Oct-2008
The court heard matters relating to the recovery by the claimant of $63,000,000. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and others CA 13-Nov-2008
The creditors sought leave to appeal against orders made in the course of proceedings to recover a very substantial debt from a foreign resident company. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company Sal CA 6-Feb-2009
Appeal from order with regard to management of receivership. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 6-Oct-2010
The third respondent sought to strike out an application for his committal for failure to comply with orders made in support of proceedings to enforce a substantial judgment. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal ComC 21-Oct-2010
The court held a case management conference with regard to an intended application for committal for contempt of one of the defendants. . .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 21-Jan-2011
. .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 3-Feb-2011
. .
See Also – Masri and Another v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others ComC 3-Mar-2011
On notice hearing with regard to without notice receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 5-May-2011
The applicant, and judgment creditor sought orders for committal for contempt by the defendant companies and officers after failing to comply with court orders. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.276481

Gourlay, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board: CA 14 Jul 2017

Does the established practice of the High Court, to make no order for costs for or against an inferior tribunal or court which plays no active part in a judicial review of one of its decisions, extend to the Board?

Judges:

Gloster VP CA, David Richards, Kickinbottom LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1003, [2017] 1 WLR 4107, [2017] WLR(D) 474

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

First Instance main judgment – Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham CA 27-Feb-2004
The claimant appealed against a costs order. She had previously appealed against an order of the High Court on her application for judicial review of the inquest held by the respondent.
Held: The coroner, and others in a similar position . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Gourlay, Regina (on The Application of) v Parole Board SC 4-Dec-2020
The appellant life prisoner had successfully challenged a decision of the parole board, but had later been refused his costs on the basis that the Board had been acting in effect as a judicial body. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Costs

Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.589928

A B and others v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust: QBD 9 May 2003

The claimants were involved in a group litigation with regard to the removal of organs without consent from deceased children. The defendant sought an order capping the costs which might be claimed.
Held: In GLO cases the desirability of ensuring that costs are kept within bounds makes it unnecessary for the court to require exceptional circumstances before exercising its discretion to make a costs cap order. Any costs cap should only relate to the costs incurred in relation to generic issues. An order was made identifying limits to the separate areas. The court’s general powers of case management were sufficiently wide to encompass the making of a costs capping order both in group litigation and in other actions.

Judges:

Gage J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1034 (QB), Gazette 22-Apr-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 51

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation) CA 1987
The powers in the section together with the power to make orders for costs under Order 62 of the Rules of the Supreme Court included the power to make a pre-emptive order for costs.
Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘In these circumstances the judge . .
Cited – Solutia UK Limited v Griffiths CA 26-Apr-2001
The court considered issues relating to the appropriateness of the claimants instructing London solicitors in a case in which those solicitors had submitted a bill of costs totalling pounds 220,000 in connection with a claim in which their clients . .
Cited – The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Others QBD 17-Dec-2002
The applicant sought an advisory order from the court to interpret the meaning of United Nations Security Council resolution no 1441 with regard to steps to be taken under the resolution in the event of the failure of Iraq to comply.
Held: A . .
Cited – Home Office v Lownds (Practice Note) CA 21-Mar-2002
The respondent had been ordered to pay costs of over pounds 16,000 in an action for clinical negligence where the final award was only pounds 4,000. The Secretary of State appealed claiming that the costs were disproportionate.
Held: In such . .

Cited by:

Cited – King v Telegraph Group Ltd CA 18-May-2004
The defendant appealed against interim costs orders made in the claim against it for defamation.
Held: The general power of cost capping measures available to courts were available also in defamation proceedings. The claimant was being . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Health Professions, Costs

Updated: 22 September 2022; Ref: scu.184639

Wittman (UK) Ltd v Willdav Engineering Sa: CA 10 May 2007

Application by the respondent under CPR Rule 52.9(1)(c) for an order that the appellant be required to pay into court the amount of the judgment debt together with a sum of money on account of the costs of the action as a condition of pursuing the appeal.

Judges:

Moore-Bick LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 521

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442424

The Lord Chancellor v Alexander Johnson and Co Solicitors and Another: QBD 29 Jul 2011

The court was asked whether the respondents, a firm of solicitors and a barrister, are in respect of acting on behalf of Aaron Phillips in certain criminal proceedings entitled to fees payable under the Litigators’ Graduated Fee Scheme (GFS) or under the Very High Costs Cases (VHCC) scheme. The issue involves a point of interpretation of the Criminal Defence Services (Funding) Order 2007 as amended.

Judges:

Davis J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2113 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442461

General Motors UK Ltd v The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd: ChD 13 Jan 2017

Judges:

Behrens HHJ

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 21 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – General Motors UK Ltd v The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd ChD 30-Nov-2016
The claimants had had a long standing licence to discharge water in the defendant’s canal. Having failed to pay the license fee, the licence was revoked. The claimants sought relief from forfeiture.
Held: Granted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.573842

Bahta and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others: CA 26 Jul 2011

Appeals against decisions as to costs made by High Court Judges in immigration cases following consent orders.
Held: Even against government departments the normal provisions as to costs contained in the CPR apply, including the general rule starting point (rule 44.3(2)) that a successful claimant is entitled to his costs and the importance of complying with Pre-action Protocols (an aspect of conduct identified in rule 44.3(5)).

Judges:

Pill, Sullivan LJJ, Hedley J

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 895, [2011] 5 Costs LR 857, [2011] ACD 116, [2011] CP Rep 43

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.442180

In Re Wiseman Lee (Solicitors) (Wasted Costs Order) (No 5 of 2000): CACD 5 Apr 2001

Where a court proposed a wasted costs order it was obliged by the regulations to hear the party against whom the order was sought. An order was made allowing the solicitors to make representations before a date, but the final order was made without having heard any representations, and the engrossed order made no reference to the steps taken, and was defective.

Citations:

Times 05-Apr-2001

Statutes:

Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 19A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.82300

Sharp and Others v Blank and Others: ChD 27 Jan 2017

Judges:

Nugee J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 141 (Ch), [2017] 4 WLR 184

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 22-Jul-2015
First CMC . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 23-Jul-2015
Application for costs budgeting system to be applied . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others (2) ChD 12-Nov-2015
Last in series of judgments on application for summary judgment on claims alleging breaches of fiduciary and tortious duties owed by the Defendant directors to the Claimants as shareholders in Lloyds plc. . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others (1) ChD 12-Nov-2015
‘This judgment concerns one particular aspect of the hearing which is the Defendants’ application for summary judgment on what has been referred to as the LIBOR allegation.’ . .
Cited – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 12-Apr-2016
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 30-Jan-2017
. .
See Also – Sharp v Blank and Others ChD 21-Dec-2017
Application for approval of revised costs budget. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.599613

Sharp and Others v Blank and Others: ChD 30 Jan 2017

Judges:

Nugee J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC B17 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 22-Jul-2015
First CMC . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 23-Jul-2015
Application for costs budgeting system to be applied . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others (2) ChD 12-Nov-2015
Last in series of judgments on application for summary judgment on claims alleging breaches of fiduciary and tortious duties owed by the Defendant directors to the Claimants as shareholders in Lloyds plc. . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others (1) ChD 12-Nov-2015
‘This judgment concerns one particular aspect of the hearing which is the Defendants’ application for summary judgment on what has been referred to as the LIBOR allegation.’ . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 12-Apr-2016
. .
Cited – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 27-Jan-2017
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Sharp v Blank and Others ChD 21-Dec-2017
Application for approval of revised costs budget. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.593121

Sharp v Blank and Others: ChD 21 Dec 2017

Application for approval of revised costs budget.

Judges:

Marsh CM

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3390 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 22-Jul-2015
First CMC . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 23-Jul-2015
Application for costs budgeting system to be applied . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others (2) ChD 12-Nov-2015
Last in series of judgments on application for summary judgment on claims alleging breaches of fiduciary and tortious duties owed by the Defendant directors to the Claimants as shareholders in Lloyds plc. . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others (1) ChD 12-Nov-2015
‘This judgment concerns one particular aspect of the hearing which is the Defendants’ application for summary judgment on what has been referred to as the LIBOR allegation.’ . .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 12-Apr-2016
. .
See Also – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 27-Jan-2017
. .
Cited – Sharp and Others v Blank and Others ChD 30-Jan-2017
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.602620

D’Abo v Paget and Others (No 2): ChD 10 Aug 2000

Where a beneficiary having brought successful action against the trust fund, the rule in In re Buckton should still apply, but where the trustees could have brought the same action themselves, and had been ready and willing to do so, the beneficiary should not be awarded costs out of the trust fund. Under the new procedure, the court should take a more robust attitude to such claims. In effect the sole reason for the claimant’s participation was to make a claim for costs if the trustees failed.

Citations:

Gazette 05-Oct-2000, Times 10-Aug-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Trusts, Wills and Probate, Costs

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.79774

G v E and Others: FD 21 Dec 2010

(Court of Protection) Baker J awarded costs against a local authority which had been guilty of misconduct which, he held, justified departure from the general rule. He observed: ‘Parties should be free to bring personal welfare issues to the Court of Protection without fear of a costs sanction. Local authorities and others who carry out their work professionally have no reason to fear that a costs order will be made . . It is only local authorities who break the law, or who are guilty of misconduct that falls within the meaning of rule 159, that have reason to fear a costs order. Local authorities who do their job properly and abide by the law have nothing to fear.’ and ‘Gone are the days when it is appropriate for a court to dismiss applications for costs on the basis that it all comes out of the same pot’.

Judges:

Baker J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3385 (Fam), [2011] Fam Law 473, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 140, [2011] 1 FLR 1566

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – G v E and Others CoP 26-Mar-2010
E Was born with and still suffered severe learning difficulties. The court was asked as to the extent of his capacity to make decisions, and as to where he should live, with a family member, the carer or with the local authority, which had removed . .
See Also – G v E and Others CA 16-Jul-2010
E, now aged 19, suffered a genetic disorder leading to severe learning disability and lack of mental capacity. He had been in the care of his sister, the appellant, but had been removed by the local authority when his behaviour became disturbed. G, . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Manchester City Council v G and Others CA 2-Aug-2011
The Council had been found to have wrongfully deprived the applicant of his liberty. They appealed now against an award of costs made against them.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge the power to depart from the usual order made under rule 157 . .
Cited – In re T (Children) SC 25-Jul-2012
The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house . .
Cited – Re S (A Child) SC 25-Mar-2015
The Court was asked as to the proper approach to ordering the unsuccessful party to pay the costs of a successful appeal in cases about the care and upbringing of children. It arises in the specific context of a parent’s successful appeal to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Family

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430396

London Tara Hotel Ltd v Kensington Close Hotel Ltd: ChD 14 Jan 2011

Judges:

Roth J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 29 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main Judgment – London Tara Hotel Ltd v Kensington Close Hotel Ltd ChD 1-Nov-2010
The defendant asserted that it had acquired the right to use a private access road over the claimant’s land. There had been a licence granted under which an earlier owner had been said to have used the land. The defendant claimed under the 1832 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428081

Perrins v Holland and Others: CA 8 Dec 2010

The court heard an appeal as to costs.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1398

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Perrins v Holland and Another ChD 31-Jul-2009
The son of the deceased challenged the testamentary capacity of the testator and further claimed under the 1975 Act. The deceased was disabled and had substantial difficulty communicating.
Held: The will was validly made. Logically it is . .
See Also – Perrins v Holland and Others ChD 21-Oct-2009
. .
See Also – Perrins v Holland and Others; In re Perrins, deceased CA 21-Jul-2010
The testator had given instructions for his will and received a draft will. The judge had found that he had capacity to make the will when he gave instructions but not when it was executed. The will having been made in accordance with his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Costs

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426904