Category: Costs

Leeks v St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Others: EAT 18 Jun 2018

Employment Tribunal Procedure – Costs – Reconsideration
An application by the Claimant for an adjournment made at 9.31am on the day of the hearing of the appeal was refused.
The Claimant’s appeal was dismissed. The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in making a global award of pounds 7,500 in respect of all three Respondents; and in any event the Employment Judge did not err in law in refusing the Claimant’s application for reconsideration.

Citations:

[2018] UKEAT 0072 – 18 – 1806

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Costs

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.625444

Dyson Technology Ltd v Strutt: ChD 24 Jul 2007

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1756 (Ch), [2007] 4 Costs LR 597

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dyson Technology Ltd v Strutt ChD 25-Nov-2005
The claimant sought to restrain the defendant, one of its former engineers from working for a competitor and using the confidential knowledge he had obtained when working for them.
Held: The court set out the difficulties for a leaving . .

Cited by:

Cited – Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 14-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the success of a sale by a mortgagee in possession of various properties. The parties disputed the apportionment of costs.
Held: The appeal failed. Where there is no express agreement concerning the division of costs, a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.259658

Russell Young and Co (A Firm) v Brown and others: CA 31 Jan 2007

The court was asked to consider the liability of a tortfeasor to a claimant for a share of those costs which have been incurred by the claimant’s solicitor in investigating and settling a large number of claims of a similar nature, and which have been incurred for the joint benefit of all the claimants.
Held: The claimant had undertaken investigations for many cases, of which the lead cases were only a sample, but which would be settled folloing the lead cases. The claimants’ solicitors were entitled to their costs without having to demonstrate additional agreements with their clients for generic costs.

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Smith LJ, Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 43, Times 13-Feb-2007

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 14-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the success of a sale by a mortgagee in possession of various properties. The parties disputed the apportionment of costs.
Held: The appeal failed. Where there is no express agreement concerning the division of costs, a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Legal Professions

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.248320

Essien v Jj Joyce and Son Ltd: EAT 29 Jun 2006

EAT Practice and Procedure – Costs
Case remitted to ET on cost as reasons did not adequately explain its reasons as had insufficient evidence as to the overall level of costs as the costs expended by reasons of the Claimant’s unreasonable behaviour.

Judges:

Serota QC J

Citations:

[2006] UKEAT 0137 – 06 – 2906

Links:

Bailii

Employment, Costs

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.247782

Sutton London Borough Council v Davis (Number 2): FD 8 Jul 1994

The local authority had refused to register a childminder, who successfully appealed to the magistrates, who awarded costs in her favour. The local authority appealed against the costs order. In doing so the authority urged the court to apply, by analogy, the principle that costs are not usually ordered in child cases.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The local authority had erred in concluding that the respondent was not fit to mind children, but their stance in relation to Mrs Davis was neither reprehensible nor unreasonable.
In a large Magistrates Court family case the LAB was to be allowed to assess costs before a decision was to be made by the Justices. Justices may award costs in an adversarial children matter, and await Legal Aid Board’s assessment on the amount. It was not the normal practice to award costs in child care cases.
Wilson J said: ‘Where the debate surrounds the future of a child, the proceedings are partly inquisitorial and the aspiration is that in their outcome the child is the winner and indeed the only winner. The court does not wish the spectre of an order for costs to discourage those with a proper interest in the child from participating in the debate. Nor does it wish to reduce the chance of their co-operation around the future life of the child by casting one as the successful party entitled to his costs and another as the unsuccessful party obliged to pay them. The proposition applies in its fullest form to proceedings between parents and other relations; but it also applies to proceedings to which a local authority are a party. Thus, even when a local authority’s application for a care order is dismissed, it is unusual to order them to pay the costs of the other parties. But the proposition is not applied where, for example, the conduct of a party has been reprehensible or the party’s stance has been beyond the band of what is reasonable: Havering London Borough Council v S [1986] 1 FLR 489 and Gojkovic v Gojkovic [1992] Fam 40, 60C-D.’
and ‘In care proceedings the local authority and all other parties come into court in order to assist it in choosing the programme for the child’s future which will best serve his or her welfare. In the case of Mrs Davis the local authority made an incorrect decision as to her fitness. She had a right to be registered and they infringed it. Mrs Davis afforded them the opportunity to review their decision by lodging an objection pursuant to section 77(3) of the Children Act 1989. But they resolved that the decision should stand. In order to establish her right to be registered, Mrs Davis had to appeal to the magistrates’ court. The proceedings were adversarial and the local authority lost the argument. Such were the circumstances for application of the principle that costs should follow the event. Far from being satisfied that the justices were plainly wrong to decide that the local authority should pay the costs of Mrs Davis, I consider that they were right.’

Judges:

Wilson J

Citations:

Independent 08-Jul-1994, Gazette 31-Aug-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 1317

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Sutton London Borough Council v Davis FD 17-Mar-1994
Local Authority need not be inflexible in assessing fitness of child minder – smacking. A child minder refusing to sign Local Authority’s no-smack undertaking can still be registered. . .

Cited by:

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 . .
See Also – Sutton London Borough Council v Davis FD 17-Mar-1994
Local Authority need not be inflexible in assessing fitness of child minder – smacking. A child minder refusing to sign Local Authority’s no-smack undertaking can still be registered. . .
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 – In Re M (A Minor) (Local Authority’s Costs) FD 9-Jan-1995
The local authority applied for permission to refuse contact between two children and their parents. The magistrates refused the application and ordered the local authority to pay the father’s costs. The authority appealed.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Magistrates

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.89634

Sears Tooth (A Firm) v Payne Hicks Beach (A Firm) and Others: FD 24 Jan 1997

An agreement to deduct legal costs of proceedings from a divorce award was not champertous or unlawful.

Citations:

Gazette 05-Feb-1997, Times 24-Jan-1997, [1997] 2 FLR 116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wyatt v Vince SC 11-Mar-2015
Long delayed ancillary relief application proceeds
The parties had divorced some 22 years before, but no ancillary relief order had been made to satisfy the application outlined in the petition. The parties when together had lived in relative poverty, but H had subsequently become wealthy. W applied . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs, Family

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.89083

Northstar Systems Ltd and others v Fielding and others; Ultraframe (UK) Ltd and Others v Fielding and Others (No 2): CA 6 Dec 2006

The parties had disputed ownership of intellectual property rights. The court had found certain parties dishonest. The judge had found the successful defendants honest and adjusted the costs order in their favour. The claimants appealed.
Held: If dishonesty had been found, the fact that the paying party had not sought an order from the judge reflecting the misconduct, should not deprive that party of the right of referring to the finding, on the assessment, when considering whether the costs incurred by the dishonest party were reasonable. At the same time the judge making such a finding should express in his judgment whether and what adjustment he had made. This would avoid any risk of double jeopardy.
Waller LJ said: ‘What then is the position if a paying party has a finding of dishonesty of the winning party in his favour, and raises that factor as a ground for a reduction of the costs at the end of the trial? Clearly there is no problem if the judge’s order makes ‘no order as to costs’, but if the judge orders a reduction by say 20% without more, what would be the natural construction of that order? My view is that the natural construction of such an order, unless the contrary is expressly stated, is that the party guilty of dishonesty should not be entitled to say on assessment, ‘my costs incurred in seeking to make a dishonest case can be taken as reasonably incurred because the judge has made a reduction’. If the dishonest party was entitled to succeed on such an argument, he will hardly suffer any penalty at all.
It seems to me that a consideration of a party’s conduct should normally take place both at the stage when the judge is considering what order for costs he should make, and then during assessment. But the court will want to ensure that dishonesty is penalised but that the party is not placed in double jeopardy. Ultimately, the question is one of the proper construction of the order made by the judge.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Jacob

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1660, Times 08-Jan-2007

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Aaron v Shelton 2004
A party wishing to raise a matter concerning the conduct of the opposing party, either before or during litigation, was under a duty to raise it before the judge making the costs order, was too broadly stated. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Business Environment Bow Lane Ltd v Deanwater Estates Ltd ChD 31-Jul-2009
The court was asked ‘Where a claimant has picked up one or more costs orders in its favour on the way to a trial, but fails very badly at the trial (for example due to exaggeration), can the costs judge assess those costs at nil on the footing that . .
Cited – Drew v Whitbread CA 9-Feb-2010
The personal injury claimant sought to raise on taxation, matters not put to the trial judge when making the costs order. The personal injuries case had been allocated to the multi-track. The judge at trial had awarded costs on the standard basis, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246803

Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of Canada and others v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (Uk) and Another: ComC 16 Nov 2006

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2885 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cherkley Campaign Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Mole Valley District Council and Another Admn 15-Nov-2013
Decision after successful request for judicial review of decision to grant planning permission. The respondent and interested party resisted costs orders saying that the claimant had not been successful on all points.
Held: In general the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246736

Haghighi: LT 20 Oct 2006

LT COSTS – application for modification of restrictive covenant – application by applicant to dismiss proceedings – application for modification dismissed – applicant to pay objectors’ costs on standard basis – Law of Property Act 1925, s84

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LP – 13 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 84

Land, Costs

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246691

Currey v Currey: CA 18 Oct 2006

Where one party in an ancillary relief claim was not entitled to legal aid, but showed a need for legal representation which he or she could not afford, the court could make an order requiring the other party to make a costs allowance. The nature of the husband’s application here was defensive, and the order should remain, though: ‘Whenever a court decided to make a costs allowance, it ought to proceed with a judicious mixture of realism and caution as to both its amount and duration.’
Wilson LJ referred to the danger that a decision-maker’s attempt to explain his decision in terms which include reference to exceptionality would give rise to the subsequent elevation of a concept of exceptionality as the governing criterion: ‘In my view the initial, overarching inquiry is into whether the applicant for a costs allowance can demonstrate that she cannot reasonably procure legal advice and representation by any other means. Thus, to the extent that she has assets, the applicant has to demonstrate that they cannot reasonably be deployed, whether directly or as the means of raising a loan, in funding legal services. Furthermore . . she has also to demonstrate that she cannot reasonably procure legal services by the offer of a charge upon ultimate capital recovery.’
As regards the request for a costs allowance: ‘In my view the initial, overarching inquiry is into whether the applicant for a costs allowance can demonstrate that she cannot reasonably procure legal advice and representation by any other means. Thus, to the extent that she has assets, the applicant has to demonstrate that they cannot reasonably be deployed, whether directly or as the means of raising a loan, in funding legal services. Furthermore . . she has also to demonstrate that she cannot reasonably procure legal services by the offer of a charge upon ultimate capital recovery.’

Judges:

Chadwick LJ, Wilson LJ, Lindsay J

Citations:

Times 03-Nov-2006, [2007] Fam Law 12, [2007] 2 Costs LR 227, [2007] 1 FLR 946, [2006] EWCA Civ 1338

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Currey v Currey CA 8-Dec-2003
Appeals against ancillary relief orders and costs orders. The husband complained that the judge had in effect taken over the case asking leading questions of the parties.
Held: The judge’s task in a family matter was to obtain an accurate . .
Cited – Barder v Caluori HL 2-Jan-1987
In divorce proceedings, the husband had transferred his interest in the matrimonial home to the wife who had been awarded care and control of the two children of the family. The order was made on 20 February 1985 and on 25 March the wife unlawfully . .
Cited – A v A (Maintenance Pending Suit: Payment of Legal Fees) FD 2001
The court made an order to provide that the monies paid by way of maintenance pending suit in respect of any matter can be brought into account by the judge making the order in the ancillary relief proceedings. . .

Cited by:

Cited – In re F (Children) CA 27-Oct-2010
The mother appealed against refusal of a specific issue order requested to allow her to remove the four children with her from Cleveland to Stronsay in the Orkneys. Both parents were GPs and accepted to be excellent parents. She and her new partner . .
Cited – Rubin v Rubin FD 10-Mar-2014
The court heard an application by the wife for a legal services payment order. . .
Cited – Wyatt v Vince SC 11-Mar-2015
Long delayed ancillary relief application proceeds
The parties had divorced some 22 years before, but no ancillary relief order had been made to satisfy the application outlined in the petition. The parties when together had lived in relative poverty, but H had subsequently become wealthy. W applied . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Costs

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246714

Eiles v London Borough of Southwark: TCC 28 Jul 2006

Quantification of claim for damages for damage from tree roots. Costs order.

Judges:

Ramset J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2014 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main judgment – Eiles v London Borough of Southwark TCC 22-Jun-2006
Claim for damages – subsidence caused by tree roots. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Damages, Costs

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245898

Balmoral Group Ltd. v Borealis (UK) Ltd and others: ComC 17 Oct 2006

Whether losing party should pay costs on standard or on indemnity basis.
Held: Something had to have occurred to take the case outside the norm.

Judges:

Gloster J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2531 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main Judgment – Balmoral Group Ltd v Borealis [UK] Ltd and others ComC 25-Jul-2006
The claimants manufactured and sold storage tanks. They sought substantial damages after chemical materials purchased from the defendants to help bond the tanks failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.245372

Aird and Another v Prime Meridian Ltd: TCC 19 Sep 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2338 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust etc CA 11-May-2004
The court considered the effect on costs orders of a refusal to take part in alternate dispute resolution procedures. The defendant Trust had refused to take the dispute to a mediation. In neither case had the court ordered or recommended ADR.

Cited by:

Appeal from – Aird and Another v Prime Meridian Ltd CA 21-Dec-2006
The court had ordered preparation of a joint statement by the parties expert witnesses with a view to encouraging mediation. The claimant obtained an order that the statement was privileged, and could not be used later in the proceedings.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.245200

Fulham Leisure Holdings Ltd v Nicholson Graham and Jones: ChD 5 Oct 2006

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2428 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Principal Judgment – Fulham Leisure Holdings Ltd v Nicholson Graham and Jones ChD 14-Feb-2006
The defendant solicitors were being sued for professional negligence. The claimants had taken legal advice after termination of the retainer which led to the present action, and sought to rely upon part of counsel’s opinion. The defendants sought . .

Cited by:

See Also (Costs) – Fulham Leisure Holdings Ltd v Nicholson Graham and Jones (A Firm) CA 28-Feb-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.245191

Environment Agency v Lewin Fryer and Partners: TCC 6 Jul 2006

The defendants had started but abandoned a request against third parties, and had to pay their costs. It now sought those and its own costs from the claimant, saying that the abortive application would have been unnecessary had the claimant complied with its own disclosure obligations. The claimant said the court did not have jurisdiction to make such an order.
Held: The court had the power to make such an order, but only to the extent that the defendants’ action had been reasonable, and the result would be reasonable and appropriate. As regards the claimant’s main contractor, many of the documents were within the claimant’s control as the instructing client. The application by the defendant had been delayed as long as it could, and the claimant had not been open about its own discussions with its contractors about disclosure. As against subcontractors, the claimant did not have the same control, and a costs order against the claimants was not appropriate in those respects.

Judges:

peter Coulson QC J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1597 (TCC), (2006) 22 Const LJ 574

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 31 44.3

Litigation Practice, Costs, Construction

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244135

Rogers v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council: CA 31 Jul 2006

The Court considered the validity of after the event legal expenses insurance and conditional fee agreements schemes, and in particular whether an ATE premium was recoverable by a successful claimant. The damages had been agreed in the sum of pounds 3,105 plus interest. The case went to trial and the claimant won. The deputy district judge assessed the costs in the sum of pounds 16,821. This included an ATE premium of pounds 5,103.
Held: The premium was recoverable as a proportionate expense if it was necessarily incurred, even if the amount was large in comparison with the amount of damages reasonably claimed. In support of justifying the premium charged, the court envisaged a note from the solicitor explaining how a particular ATE product came to be chosen and whether it was block rated or individually rated.
Brooke LJ said: ‘In this case it might be thought that all the considerations urged on the court by Mr Bartlett which favour the course taken by Mr Cater, the appellant’s solicitor, might go to demonstrate the reasonableness of his bill of costs – specifically, the ATE insurance staged premium – but not its proportionality: precisely because they have nothing to do with the quantum of the claim. But we do not think that is right. If the court concludes that it was necessary to incur the staged premium, then as this court’s judgment in [Lownds] shows, it should be adjudged a proportionate expense. Necessity here is, we think, not some absolute litmus test. It may be demonstrated by the application of strategic considerations which travel beyond the dictates of the particular case. Thus it may include, as we are persuaded it does, the unavoidable characteristics of the market in insurance of this kind. It does so because this very market is integral to the means of providing access to justice in civil disputes in what may be called the post-legal aid world.
It is important to recognise that this conclusion runs with, not across, the grain of the procedural reforms expressed in the CPR. The very recognition that justice requires a use of resources that is proportionate to what is at stake implies the rightness of a strategic approach. There can be no touchstone of a proportionate use of resources so understood, without an eye to the context in which any such resources are expended. Once it is concluded that the ATE staged premium here was necessarily incurred, principle and pragmatism together compel the conclusion that it was a proportionate expense. We turn therefore to the question whether the ATE staged premium was necessarily incurred.’

Judges:

Brooke VP CA, Laws, Smith LJJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1134, [2007] 1 WLR 808, [2006] Lloyd’s Rep IR 759, [2007] 1 All ER 354, [2007] 1 Costs LR 77

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Tankard v John Fredricks Plastics Ltd; Jones v Attrill etc CA 11-Dec-2008
The defendants sought to argue that the conditional fee arrangement used by the claimant’s solicitors had been void under the 2000 regulations. They claimed that the solicitors had failed to disclose an interest in the policies sold.
Held: No . .
Cited – Kris Motor Spares Ltd v Fox Williams Llp QBD 12-May-2010
The claimant sought to challenge the After the Event Insurance (ATE) bought by its solicitors late in the day in their claim, before then withdrawing the conditional fee agreement. The premium was over andpound;90,000.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Cited – Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 14-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the success of a sale by a mortgagee in possession of various properties. The parties disputed the apportionment of costs.
Held: The appeal failed. Where there is no express agreement concerning the division of costs, a . .
Cited – Kris Motor Spares Ltd v Fox Williams Llp QBD 12-May-2010
The claimant sought to challenge the After the Event Insurance (ATE) bought by its solicitors late in the day in their claim, before then withdrawing the conditional fee agreement. The premium was over andpound;90,000.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Cited – Coventry and Others v Lawrence and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
The appellants challenged the compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights of the system for recovery of costs in civil litigation in England and Wales following the passing of the Access to Justice Act 1999. The parties had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Legal Professions

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244103

Al-Koronky and Another v Time-Life Entertainment Group Ltd and Another: CA 28 Jul 2006

The claimants sought damages after publication of articles alleging severe mistreatment of a servant. One defendant had settled and apologised, but the defendant publisher and author had persisted with the allegation. The claimants who lived in Sudan, now appealed an order that they provide security for costs, seeking to adduce additional evidence of their means.
Held: ‘the court, once satisfied that the case is one in which the claimant ought to put up security for the defendant’s costs before continuing with his action, is going to find itself in one of two situations. Either it will be satisfied that it probably has a full account of the resources available to the claimant, in which case it can calculate with reasonable confidence how much the claimant can afford to put up; or it will not be satisfied that it has a full account, and so cannot make the calculation. Does it follow in the latter situation that the court must go straight to the amount sought by the defendant and, having pruned it of anything which appears excessive or disproportionate, fix that as the security? Or is there a middle way – for example to set an amount which represents the court’s best estimate of what the claimant, despite having been insufficiently candid, can afford?
In our judgment there is such a power, but it resides in the court’s discretion rather than in legal principle. In the second situation we have postulated, the requirements of the law have been exhausted: what remains is to set a suitable sum. This classically is where discretion fills the space left by judgment: the court has a choice of courses, none of which it can be criticised for taking provided it makes its election on a proper factual basis uninfluenced by extraneous considerations. ‘

Judges:

Sedley LJ, Keene LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

Times 28-Aug-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 1123

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ladd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
Cited – Electra Private Equity Partners (a Limited Partnership) and others v KPMG Peat Marwick (a Firm) and others CA 23-Apr-1999
In interlocutory appeals some relaxation of the strictness of the conditions set down in Ladd v Marshall might be appropriate, according to the nature of the interlocutory hearing and the individual circumstances of the case. That would particularly . .
Cited – Banks and Another v Cox and Another CA 17-Jul-2000
The court considered the principles of admitting new evidence on appeal after the introduction of the new rules. Moritt LJ: ‘In my view the principles reflecting in the rules in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 remain relevant to any application . .
Cited – Bubbins v United Kingdom ECHR 17-Mar-2005
The deceased had returned home drunk, and climbed in through a window. His girlfriend saw only his legs and reported an intruder to the police. He refused to identify himself when challenged by the police and on pointing a gun from the window he was . .
Cited – Hamilton v Al Fayed (No 4) CA 2001
The court considered the applicability of cases before the introduction of the new rules on the exercise of a judge’s discretion.
Held: The old cases ‘remain powerful persuasive authority’. . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Investments Ltd v Bubb and Another CA 25-Jul-2000
When considering an application for a re-hearing of a County Court action in order to consider and admit new evidence, the county court and High Court practice is now the same and the judge should consider the list of questions in Ladd v Marshall, . .
Cited – Thune v London Properties Limited CA 1990
The court considered the applicability of the principles in Ladd v Marshall to an appeal from an interlocutory order being an application for security for costs.
Held: The application to admit fresh evidence was refused. Bingham LJ: ‘There is . .
Cited – Keary Developments v Tarmac Constructions CA 1995
The court set out the principles to be applied by the court upon an application for security for costs.
1. The court has a complete discretion whether to order security, and accordingly it will act in the light of all the relevant . .
Cited – Brimko Holdings Limited v Eastman Kodak Company 2004
The defendant sought security for costs. The court considered the burden of proof in such a claim: ‘. . the court should not restrict its evaluation of the ability of a claimant to provide security to the means of the claimant itself. If the . .
Cited – Nasser v United Bank of Kuwait CA 11-Apr-2001
The claimant, a foreign resident, alleged that her jewels had been stolen from a deposit box while in possession of the defendants. The defendants sought security for costs.
Held: An order for security may not legitimately be based on the bare . .
Cited – Tolstoy Miloslavsky v United Kingdom ECHR 19-Jul-1995
The applicant had been required to pay andpound;124,900 as security for the respondent’s costs as a condition of his appeal against an award of damages in a defamation case.
Held: It followed from established case law that article 6(1) did not . .
Cited – Kufaan Publishing Ltd v Al-Warrak Publishing Ltd CA 1-Mar-2002
. .
Cited – Buttes Oil and Gas Co v Hammer (No 3) HL 1982
The House considered a dispute between two Us oil companies about the right to exploit an oil field in the Gulf. Each claimed to have a concession granted by the ruler of a Gulf state. Each state claimed that the oil field was within its territorial . .
Cited – Campbell v MGN Ltd (No 2) HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant sought to challenge the level of costs sought by the claimant after she had succeeded in her appeal to the House. Though a relatively small sum had been awarded, the costs and success fee were very substantial. The newspaper claimed . .
Cited – Jeyaretnam v Mahmood 21-May-1992
For the purpose of an application to discharge an order for service on a defendant outside the jurisdiction, the court declined to evaluate allegations of lack of independence or impartiality in the defendant’s home country of Singapore on the . .
Cited – Skrine and Co (a Firm) and others v Euromoney Publications plc and others QBD 10-Nov-2000
The court was asked to strike out parts of a defemation pleading alleging that (i) the Malaysian Prime Minister had acted in a manner intended and/or calculated to interfere with the independent judiciary; (ii) Malaysian judges applied the law of . .
Appeal from – Al-Koronky and Another v Time Life Entertainment Group Ltd and Another QBD 29-Jul-2005
The defendant to the defamation claim sought security for costs. There had been allegations of dishonesty on either side.
Held: The court should not, upon such an application, enter into the merits of the case in any detail, save in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243991

Gaynor v Central West London Buses Ltd: CA 28 Jul 2006

The solicitors appealed a finding that a conditional fee agreement with their client was unenforceable as against their client for failing to meet the requirements of the 1990 Act, which in turn deprived them of a right to claim the costs from the defendant. It was said that the client care letter did not show an unconditional intention to enter into a conditional fee agreement for services provided before the agreement.
Held: The solicitor’s appeal failed. The purpose of s58 was the protection of clients. ‘the work done before a decision is made not to pursue the claim pursuant to the last paragraph on the page is not the provision of litigation services. In my judgment, ‘contemplated proceedings’ are proceedings of which it can be said that there is at least a real likelihood that they will be issued. Until the potential defendant disputes the claim, it is not possible to say that proceedings are contemplated. Advising a client as to whether he or she has a good prima facie case and writing a letter of claim are not enough to amount to litigation services. ‘

Judges:

Dyson LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1120, Times 25-Aug-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, Access to Justice Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hollins v Russell etc CA 22-May-2003
Six appeals concerned a number of aspects of the new Conditional Fee Agreement.
Held: It should be normal for a CFA, redacted as necessary, to be disclosed for costs proceedings where a success fee is claimed. If a party seeks to rely on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243994

The Scottish Lion Insurance Company Ltd, Re Sanction of A Scheme of Arrangement: SCS 8 Mar 2006

Sanction had been sought for a scheme of arrangement on the winding up of an insurance company. There were objections. The original scheme had been proposed under English law, and it would be inappropriate for a Scottish court to try to sanction such an arrangement. Payment of et fess of Engliah lawyers was sought.
Held: the court could not sanction the payment in the manner requested. The court set out how the Auditor must look at the English solicitor’s fee account.

Citations:

[2006] ScotCS CSOH – 37

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Companies Act 1985 425, Court of Session Act 1988, Interpretation Act 1978 811

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Wilson v Craig 1983
. .
Cited – Wimpey Construction (UK) Ltd v Martin Black and Co (Wire Ropes) Ltd 1988
The provisions of the Table of Fees under the Rules of Court were only applicable to Scottish solicitors. The court set out how fees incurred to solicitors practising outside Scotland are recovered in a Scottish taxation of expenses. In summary: 1. . .
Cited – Laing v Scottish Arts Council SCS 15-Dec-2000
A Lord Ordinary has power to correct an interlocutor to bring it into line with the court’s original intention. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Insolvency, Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.238902

Beoco Ltd v Alfa Laval Co Ltd and Another: CA 21 Dec 1993

The tort loss of profit principles can apply in contract cases for damages. No economic loss damages were to be claimed after a supervening incident prevented a return to work.
As to costs incurred after a late amendment, Stuart-Smith LJ said: ‘As a general rule where a plaintiff makes a late amendment as here, which substantially alters the case the defendant has to meet and without which the action will fail, the defendant was entitled to the costs of the action down to the date of the amendment’, though ‘There may, of course, be special reasons why this general rule should not be applied. An example of this is . . where the judge was satisfied that, even if the amendment had been made earlier, the action would have been vigorously resisted.’

Judges:

Balcombe, Stuart-Smith, Peter Gibson LJJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 24-Jan-1994, Times 12-Jan-1994, [1993] EWCA Civ 22, [1995] QB 137, [1994] 4 All ER 464, [1994] CLC 111, 66 BLR 1, [1994] 3 WLR 1179

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Ireland v David Lloyd Leisure Ltd CA 14-Jun-2013
The claimant sought damages after being injured working out in the defendant’s gym. A weights machine had chopped off the top of her finger when it came to rest. The defendant appealed against a finding that the warnings had been inadequate.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.78346

National Westminster Bank Plc v Kotonou and Another: ChD 19 Jun 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1785 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – National Westminster Bank Plc v Kotonou CA 26-Feb-2007
. .
See Also – National Westminster Bank v Kotonou ChD 11-Dec-2009
. .
See Also – Kotonou v National Westminster Bank Plc ChD 5-Jul-2010
. .
See Also – Kotonou v National Westminster Bank Plc CA 30-Oct-2015
Appeal against summary dismissal of claim against the bank based on Henderson v Henderson.
Gloster LJ, commented on Buxton LJ’s observations in the Taylor Walton case: ‘Thus, in my view, what is required in the present case is ‘an intense focus . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243390

Garrett v Halton Borough Council: CA 18 Jul 2006

Citations:

[2007] 1 WLR 554, [2006] EWCA Civ 1017

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 58, Access to Justice Act 1999 27(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mountain v Hastings CA 16-Apr-1993
The tenant disputed the effect of a notice to quit. Paragraph 3 of the form read: ‘The landlord intends to seek possession on grounds . . in Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1988, which reads: Give the full text of each ground which is being relied on. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Garrett v Halton Borough Council CA 16-Mar-2007
The defendants argued that the conditional fee agreement in use by the claimant’s solicitors was void and so in breach of the rules.
Held: In assessing whether there was any ‘interest’ for the purposes of the Regulation, the court looked to . .
Cited – Jones v Wrexham Borough Council CA 19-Dec-2007
The claimant appealed against a decision that the conditional fee agreement with her solicitors had been unenforceable because the solicitors had not disclosed to her a conflicting interest in recommending insurers. The issue was whether the CFA was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243301

Singh v Public Service Commission: PC 13 May 2019

(Trinidad and Tobago) Court’s discretion as to costs where an application is made for leave to apply for Judicial Review, but where no such proceedings are thereafter instituted, because the subject matter of the applicant’s complaint is speedily resolved.

Judges:

Lord Reed, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden

Citations:

[2019] UKPC 18

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.638481

Daly v The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: EAT 22 Mar 2019

Appellate Jurisdiction : Reasons : Burns- Barke : Costs – The Claimant had pursued some 27 allegations of disability discrimination before the Employment Tribunal (‘ET’). After a fully contested hearing over five days, the ET had dismissed the Claimant’s claims. In providing its reasons, the ET set out its findings on each matter separately, under a summary of the allegation itself, and referred back to those findings – by paragraph number – when setting out its conclusions.
Subsequently, the ET made an order for costs against the Claimant.
The Claimant appealed both decisions. On the ET’s Judgment on Liability, he complained that its reasoning was inadequate: the ET had failed to make findings on some allegations; where it had made findings, it had failed to explain why it had formed the view that it had; it had failed to explain its position on critical documentary evidence; and it had failed to explain why it had reached the position it had when setting out its conclusions. The Claimant also raised a procedural issue regarding late disclosure by the Respondent. On the Costs Judgment, the Claimant contended that the ET had failed to demonstrate that it had considered its exercise of discretion – an essential second stage of the decision-making process.
Held: allowing the liability appeal in part and allowing the costs appeal.
In most respects, taking the ET’s reasoning as a whole, the ET’s findings were apparent and it was clear to the reader (particularly the parties, who did not come to the Judgment as strangers to the case) why the ET had preferred the evidence of the Respondent to that of the Claimant and why it had reached the view it had. As for the documentary evidence, it was unclear whether the points made on appeal had been raised below or what the oral evidence had been; in the circumstances, the Claimant could not make good his challenge to the adequacy of the reasons on this basis. The Claimant’s appeal would, however, be allowed in relation to allegations X and Y – relating to his complaint that false reports had been made against him and that statements and evidence to support those reports were not provided to him; it was not possible to see that the ET had made findings on these points and, to that limited extent, the liability appeal would be allowed. The additional objection made, in respect of what the Claimant contended was a procedural irregularity, did not, however, establish any unfairness: the new material had added nothing of substance to what was already before the ET.
As for the costs appeal, there were three stages to the ET’s consideration of costs application: (i) to determine whether its jurisdiction to make a costs award was engaged; (ii) if so, to then consider whether it should make costs award in that case (the use of the word ‘may’ made clear this was a matter of discretion); (iii) to determine the amount of any such award. In the present case, there was nothing to suggest that the ET had understood it had a discretion in making an award of costs, the reasoning moved straight from (i) to (iii). That was an error of law and the Claimant’s appeal would be allowed.

Citations:

[2019] UKEAT 0107 – 18 – 2203

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Costs

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.638491

PR Records Ltd v Vinyl 2000 Ltd and Another: ChD 18 Jul 2007

Application to join third party – appeal against refusal – nature of the inquiry which a court should be asked to undertake on an application by a party to proceedings to join someone who was previously not a party to those proceedings, for the purpose of seeking a non-party costs order.

Judges:

Morgan J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1721 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Costs

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.259427

Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another: CA 6 Apr 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 621

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Feakins and Another v Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs CA 8-Jun-2006
The claimants sought to re-open their appeal saying that the respondent department had failed properly to describe the workings of the clawback scheme under which its claim had been made.
Held: A DEFRA official had provided materially . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242144

Wylde v Culver: ChD 12 Apr 2006

The claimant sought to discontinue his probate action on the day of trial, and an order as to costs.
Held: The discontinuance should be allowed, there being no public interest to be served in a continuance. As to costs ‘in probate actions there is no stated presumption that a discontinuing claimant should pay the costs down to the discontinuance. However I approach the question of costs on the basis that the Claimant, in seeking to discontinue, should ordinarily pay the costs, and that the onus lies with him to show why there should be some different order. Shortly stated, in the absence of some good reason for a different order, it can be taken that the action was wrongly brought. This, after all, would be the starting point if the action went to trial and was dismissed. ‘ In this case, the claimant had been reasonable in acting on the issues on which the action was based, and he should not be ordered to pay the costs on the discontinuance. No order for costs was made.

Judges:

George Bompas QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 923 (Ch), [2006] 1 WLR 2674, [2006] 4 All ER 345

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Green v Briscoe 9-May-2005
The Court had dismissed an action brought to obtain an order pronouncing against a will, revocation of the probate granted in respect of the will and a declaration of intestacy. The defendant executor had counterclaimed for a grant of probate in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Costs, Wills and Probate

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241462

D and D W v Portsmouth Hospital NHS; in re W (A Child): CA 3 May 2006

The claimants had sought court orders against the hospital to secure continuing life-supporting treatment for their daughter who had been born very severely disabled. The Trust now sought their costs from the various actions.
Held: The parents should pay nothing: ‘We are very conscious of the fact that W continues to be treated by the Trust. It would, in our view, be an aggravating factor in the relationship between Mr and Mrs W and the Trust were they to be engaged in ongoing litigation over costs’ and ‘the whole exercise set out in this judgment could have been avoided if the parties had taken proper note of Laws LJ’s observations set out in paragraph 11 above. The point should not have been contentious. Whether or not the Trust succeeds against the Legal Services Commission is not a matter for this court, nor is it of any personal financial interest to Mr. and Mrs. W. Instead of a sensible recognition that, in a case of this nature, the Trust was entitled to ask that the LSC reimburse it a relatively small proportion of the costs it has expended on this case overall, we have had a plethora of skeleton arguments and a full hearing.’

Judges:

Laws LJ, Wall LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

Times 08-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 529, [2006] 5 Costs LR 742

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 11(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Wyatt and Another v Portsmouth Hospital NHS and Another CA 12-Oct-2005
The appellants’ daughter had been born with very severe disabilities. Her doctors obtained an order allowing them a discretion not to ventilate her to keep her alive if necessary. She had improved, but the family now sought leave to appeal an order . .
Cited – Regina (Gunn) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Regina (Kelly) v Same Regina (Zahid Khan) v Same CA 14-Jun-2001
The new Regulations and court rules expressly reserved to a costs judge the decision about whether a costs order should be made against the Legal Services Commission. The former practice of the trial judge making this decision must no longer apply. . .
Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co and Another (2) CA 16-Jan-2003
The claimant had been funded for a personal injury claim under legal aid. He appealed against a decision that he was not a ‘patient’ and that he had been fully capable of managing and administering his affairs for many years. He lost. The . .
Cited – In re T (A Child), (Order for Costs) CA 21-Mar-2005
The court re-affirmed what were described as the ‘well-established principles’ relating to costs in private law applications. . .
Cited – Burke, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council and others (Official Solicitor and others intervening) CA 28-Jul-2005
The claimant suffered a congenital degenerative brain condition inevitably resulting in a future need to receive nutrition and hydration by artificial means. He was concerned that a decision might be taken by medical practitioners responsible for . .
Cited – In Re O (A Minor) (Costs:Liability of Legal Aid Board); orse Re O (A Minor) (Legal Aid Costs) CA 25-Nov-1996
Grandparents should have conceded at an early stage in the Court of Appeal that an order made by the judge in proceedings relating to their grandchild had been made without jurisdiction.
Held: The court considered the procedures for applying . .

Cited by:

Cited – Floyd and Another v Legal Services Commission QBD 28-Apr-2010
The claimant had succeeded in an action against her legally aided opponent, but then delayed in making her claim for costs against the respondent. The costs judge said that the CPR did not apply, and that he had no discretion to extend the time . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241409

Wilkinson v Kitzinger and Another: FD 12 Apr 2006

The petitioner intended to seek a declaration as to her marital status. She and the respondent had married in a civil ceremony in British Columbia in 2003. She sought a declaration of incompatibility with regard to section 11(3) of the 1973 Act so far as it failed to recognise same sex marriages. She now sought a protective costs order.
Held: The present proceedings sought to establish a matter of public law. There was little chance of section 11(3) of the 1973 Act being read down, but the case was not unarguable. Applying the Corner House case principles, there was a matter or proper and considerable public interest. The petitioner did however have a private interest in the issues. Although a protective costs order was not made, the court made an order limiting the amount of costs which the Lord Chancellor’s representatives might claim.

Judges:

Sir Mark Potter P

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 835 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Law Act 1986 55, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 11(c), Civil Partnership Act 2004, European Convention on Human Rights 88, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Smith and Grady v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Sep-1999
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
Cited – Bellinger v Bellinger HL 10-Apr-2003
Transgender Male to Female not to marry as Female
The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but Mrs B had previously undergone gender re-assignment surgery. Section 11(c) of the 1973 Act required a marriage to be between a male and a female. It was argued that the section was incompatible . .
Cited – S L v Austria ECHR 9-Jan-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 14+8 ; Not necessary to examine Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings . .
Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
Cited – Salgueiro da Silva Mouta v Portugal ECHR 1-Dec-1998
A homosexual claimed that an award of custody of his daughter to her mother was an unjustified interference with his right to respect for family life, and also with his right to respect for his private life since he was required in respect of his . .
Cited – Salgueiro Da Silva Mouta v Portugal ECHR 21-Dec-1999
There was a difference in treatment between the applicant and a comparator based on the applicant’s sexual orientation, a concept which is undoubtedly covered by Article 14. The list set out in this provision is of an indicative nature and is not . .
Cited – Regina v Lord Chancellor’s Department ex parte Child Poverty Action Group Admn 6-Feb-1998
The claimant sought an order with regard to its costs in an anticipated application to the court. The application was refused. Requests in a public interest action for an advance order for costs could only be awarded in very exceptional . .
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 – Salgueiro Da Silva Mouta v Portugal ECHR 21-Dec-1999
There was a difference in treatment between the applicant and a comparator based on the applicant’s sexual orientation, a concept which is undoubtedly covered by Article 14. The list set out in this provision is of an indicative nature and is not . .
Cited – Johnston and Others v Ireland ECHR 18-Dec-1986
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 8; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage . .
Cited – B And L v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Sep-2005
The claimants said that UK law was inconsistent in its treatment of marriage between in-laws, since it provided that it was available only by means of a private Act of parliament.
Held: The provision was irrational and infringed the human . .
Cited – Frette v France ECHR 26-Feb-2002
A single homosexual man complained that the respondent state had made it impossible for him to adopt a child.
Held: The claim was within the ambit of article 8 as regards respect for family life, but the court dismissed the claim under article . .

Cited by:

See Also – Wilkinson v Kitzinger and others FD 31-Jul-2006
The parties had gone through a ceremony of marriage in Columbia, being both women. After the relationship failed, the claimant sought a declaration that the witholding of the recognition of same-sex marriages recoginised in a foreign jurisdiction . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Human Rights, Costs

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240373

Baxendale-Walker v The Law Society: Admn 30 Mar 2006

The solicitor appealed being struck off. He had given a character reference in circumstances where he did not have justification for the assessment.
Held: ‘The appellant knew that Barclays Bank trusted him to provide a truthful reference. Instead, it received a fiction, on which it acted, which had no basis in fact. ‘ and ‘Neither age nor experience should be needed to teach a solicitor what was obvious. ‘ The Tribunal’s order of suspension was not excessive or out of line with the previous approach to breaches of a solicitor’s obligations. The Law Society, once it had decided to allege dishonesty should have required the applicant to state the basis of his admission, but no injustice had been done.
As to the costs: ‘In considering an award of costs against a public regulator the court must consider on the one hand the financial prejudice to the particular complainant, weighed against the need to encourage public bodies to exercise their public function of making reasonable and sound decisions without fear of exposure to undue financial prejudice, if the decision is successfully challenged. ‘ The tribunal had been wrong to make the order for a contribution to the applicants costs.

Citations:

Times 17-May-2006, [2006] EWHC 643 (Admin), [2006] 3 All ER 675, [2006] 5 Costs LR 696

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Solicitors’ (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 1994 4(2), Solicitors Act 1974 46

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd; etc, (Practice Note) CA 30-Apr-2002
Judge’s Reasons Must Show How Reached
In each case appeals were made, following Flannery, complaining of a lack of reasons given by the judge for his decision.
Held: Human Rights jurisprudence required judges to put parties into a position where they could understand how the . .
Cited – In re Barrell Enterprises CA 1972
A judge has power to reconsider a judgement which he has delivered before the order consequent upon it has been sealed, but the judge should only exercise this power if there are strong reasons for doing so. When oral judgments have been given the . .
Cited – Briggs,Awoloye-Kio v The Law Society QBD 19-Jul-2005
. .
Cited – Langford v The Law Society 2002
A court should not interfere with an order of the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal unless it was out of line with previous penalties imposed or otherwise plainly wrong. . .
Cited – Bolton v The Law Society CA 8-Dec-1993
The solicitor who had been admitted to the Roll for two years had disbursed clients money to relatives, as part of the conveyance of property without adequate security but in the expectation that the money would be repaid. The Tribunal found that . .
Cited – Langford v The Law Society 2002
A court should not interfere with an order of the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal unless it was out of line with previous penalties imposed or otherwise plainly wrong. . .
Cited – Briggs,Awoloye-Kio v The Law Society QBD 19-Jul-2005
. .
Applied – Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley and Others HL 21-Mar-2002
Solicitors acted in a loan, giving an undertaking as to its application. In breach of that undertaking they released it to the borrower. The appellants appealed a finding of liability as contributors to the breach.
Held: ‘Money in a . .
Cited – Bradford City Metropolitan District Council v Booth QBD 10-May-2000
The local authority had refused to renew a private hire vehicle licence. That refusal was successfully challenged, and the magistrates had awarded costs on the basis that they should follow the event. The authority appealed.
Held: The . .
Cited – Gorlov v Institute of Chartered Accountants 2001
The court considered the principles applicable when considering an award of costs against a professional body carrying out its disciplinary function. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Baxendale-Walker v Law Society CA 15-Mar-2007
The solicitor appealed a finding that he had given a reference which he knew to be inappropriate, and his consequential striking off. The tribunal had found his evidence manifestly untrue.
Held: There were no grounds for disturbing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240065

Lloyd v Svenby: QBD 21 Mar 2006

Judges:

Mr Justice Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 576 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Lloyd v Svenby QBD 27-Feb-2006
The two claimants sought title to a car registration plate and to a chassis number. They were to be applied to historic racing cars.
Held: The power to assign registration marks lay with the Secretary of State. Any legal rights rested not with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239296

Haji-Ioannou and others v Frangos and others: ChD 24 Feb 2006

The successful party had not commenced proceedings for assessment of his costs. The defendant asked the court to disallow part of the costs as a penalty for non-compliance.
Held: The court had power to disallow any interest on the costs, but not any part of the costs themselves.

Judges:

Lindsay J, Master Rogers, David Harris

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 279 (Ch), Times 07-Apr-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238709

Butt v Nizami: QBD 9 Feb 2006

The court considered the effect of negotiations on costs claims: ‘Changes were made to the Rules of Court. Some of these changes, and in particular the provisions of Sections II to V of CPR45, were introduced following ‘industry wide’ discussions under the aegis of the Civil Justice Council. Agreement was reached on the recoverable costs in the different situations covered by the various sections.
It seems to me clear that the intention underlying CPR 45.7-14 was to provide an agreed scheme of recovery which was certain and easily calculated. This was done by providing fixed levels of remuneration which might over-reward in some cases and under-reward in others, but which were regarded as fair when taken as a whole.’

Judges:

Simon J

Citations:

[2006] 2 All ER 140, [2006] EWHC 159 (QB), [2006] 1 WLR 3307

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 45.7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Lamont v Burton CA 9-May-2007
The defendant had settled the claim for damages for personal injury. His payment in had been rejected, but the claimant won a smaller sum at trial. He now argued that the claimant should not receive the full 100% costs uplift provided.
Held: . .
Cited – Kilby v Gawith CA 19-May-2008
No discretion for refusal of costs
The court was asked whether it has a discretion under Rule 45.11(1) whether or not to award a claimant, who has entered into a conditional fee agreement with his solicitor, the fixed success fee of 12.5%.
Held: The court had no discretion to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238552

Jackson v Ministry of Defence: CA 12 Jan 2006

andpound;150,000 was paid into court but the claimant recovered andpound;155,000 and the judge ordered the defendant to pay 75% of the claimant’s costs. The defendant appealed. The judge had decided that when the claimant gave his evidence there was a significant degree of exaggeration.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The defendant was the successful party because the whole trial was about whether the claimant had exaggerated his claim, and the defendant had had opportunities to manage the result by payments into court.
Tuckey LJ said: ‘Persuasively and persistently though these submissions were put, I do not accept them. The claimant was successful in the sense that he established a claim for substantial damages and beat the payment into court, albeit by a small margin. The defendant was perfectly able to protect itself against the fact that it faced an exaggerated claim. As most defendants do in such circumstances, it had access to experienced lawyers and, if necessary, experts to evaluate the strength of the claim it faced. It could with the benefit of such advice – and perhaps with the benefit of hindsight in this case should have – made an earlier Part 36 payment into court, and certainly could have increased that payment into court by making a further payment after the unsuccessful settlement meeting. The judge took into account the fact that the claimant had only just beaten the payment in which had been made, as I have already said. What is more, the judge made it clear that it was open to the defendant to challenge specific items relating to the abandoned claims, such as the costs of the experts which were not relied on at trial, at the detailed assessment, where of course the claimant will only be able to recover costs which were reasonably incurred . . The reduction which the judge made – and the reduction which we can anticipate the costs judge is likely to make – must act as a considerable disincentive to claimants and their advisers against making exaggerated claims. The case of Painting is, as Miss Griffiths accepted, an exceptional case where the claimant persisted in a claim for andpound;400,000 at trial and was awarded about andpound;25,000 at the end of the process.’

Judges:

Tuckey LJ, Keene LJ, Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 46

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Widlake v BAA Ltd CA 23-Nov-2009
The claimant had succeeded in her action for personal injuries, but now appealed against the awarding of costs to the defendant. The dispute had been substantialy as to the nature and effect of her injuries. She had not disclosed earlier injury to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238305

Sharma v London Borough of Ealing: EAT 5 Jan 2006

EAT Order for costs of failed unfair dismissal claims/discrimination claims by senior employee found by Tribunal to have been untruthful; he found guilty of gross misconduct. Costs were to be assessed by the County Court; the Respondent’s bill before assessment was andpound;130,000. Were Tribunal’s reasons for costs order sufficient and compliant with the new requirements of Rule 30(6) of Schedule 1 to 2004 Regulations? Answer – yes, appeal dismissed.

Judges:

J Burke QC

Citations:

[2006] UKEAT 0399 – 05 – 0501

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Costs

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238253

C (a Child) v The Home Office and the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority: CA 3 Mar 2004

The applicant child had incurred legal expenses in applying to the Authority for compensation. The claim was successful, but the applicant was unable to rcover the expenses, and now said that that refusal infringed his human rights, since he would otherwise be unable to pursue such an action.
Held: The failure to pay legal expenses was an express part of the scheme. An application was a determination of the applicant’s civil rights, but to say that a part of the compensation on account had to be expended to pursue the claim was not a denial of rights. There was no obligation on the scheme to provide for payment of expenses.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 234, Times 01-Mar-2004, Gazette 01-Apr-2004

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs, Human Rights

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.194109

Harrods (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: VDT 1 Nov 2005

VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – Direction to pay costs to the successful party (the Appellant) – rule 29(1) of the VAT Tribunals Rules 1986 – whether costs should be awarded on the standard basis or alternatively on the indemnity basis – CPR rule 44.4 applied by analogy – in the light of their conduct of the litigation, the Commissioners directed to pay costs on the indemnity basis

Citations:

[2005] UKVAT V19318

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

VAT Tribunals Rules 1986 29(1)

Citing:

Cited – Reid Minty (a firm) v Taylor CA 2002
New CPR govern Indemnity Costs awards
The defendant had successfully defended the main claim and now appealed against the refusal of an order for costs on an indemnity basis even though judge thought that the claimants had behaved unreasonably. He had said that some conduct deserving of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.238043

Hardy and Hansons Plc v Lax: EAT 28 Nov 2005

EAT Sex Discrimination: Injury to Feelings and Other Losses
In the light of the finding at the liability hearing, upheld by the CA, that the Claimant should have been offered the opportunity to take the new post (after redundancy in respect of her old post during her maternity leave) on a job-share basis, the ET did not err in not discounting compensation on a loss of a chance basis. ET however erred in awarding andpound;14,000 for injury to feelings, which took into account irrelevant factors and was excessive (some attention being paid to the EOR guide of similar cases which, if adopted with caution, is a useful document) and was (conservatively, because of the exercise of substitution which was adopted at the invitation of the parties instead of remission) substituted by andpound;10,000.

Judges:

Burton P J

Citations:

UKEAT/0700/04, [2005] UKEAT 0700 – 04 – 2811

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Citing:

See Also – Hardys and Hansons Plc v Lax CA 7-Jul-2005
The issue of justification of discrimination is rarely a simple matter. No margin of appreciation was to be allowed to an employer. It is for the tribunal to make its own judgment as to whether the practice complained of by the employee was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236841

BE Studios Ltd v Smith and Williamson Ltd: ChD 2 Dec 2005

The claimant company had failed in its action. The court was asked to make a costs order personally against the principal director of the claimant who had controlled the litigation and funded it. He responded that no impropriety had been shown on his part to allow such an order.
Held: ‘It is not a requirement for the making of a non-party costs order against a director who has funded and controlled litigation consequent on a claim brought by his company at his instance, that impropriety must be shown in the way that the claim was prosecuted. ‘ The position of directors who procure their companies to prosecute or defend litigation is treated as special, together with ‘office holders’ over insolvent companies appointed pursuant to insolvency legislation.

Judges:

Evans-Lombe J

Citations:

Times 16-Dec-2005, [2005] EWHC 2730 (Ch), [2006] 2 All ER 811

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 51

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main Action – BE Studios Ltd v Smith and Williamson Ltd ChD 15-Jul-2005
. .
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 – Goodwood Recoveries Ltd v Breen CA 19-Apr-2005
A claim against the defendant for money owed to someone else had been bought by the claimant of which Slater, a solicitor, was a director and shareholder. The claim was pursued in the name of the claimant by Slater as its solicitor and principal . .
Cited – Carborundum Abrasives Ltd v Bank of New Zealand (No 2) 1992
(New Zealand High Court) The court considered the position of company directors in litigation by their companies: ‘The directors of a company may frequently be in a position different from other non-parties with a direct financial interest in . .
Cited – Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others and Other Actions CA 5-Mar-1999
A court which was considering ordering a third party, who was not party to the action, to pay costs in an action, should first be satisfied that it is just to do so in all the circumstances. There is no need to establish any exceptional . .
Cited – Arklow Investments Ltd v Maclean 19-May-2000
(High Court of New Zealand) The court considered the potential personal responsibility of a directors for costs incurred by the company in litigation: ‘Where a person is a major shareholder and dominant director in a company which brings . .
Cited – Dymocks Franchise Systems (NSW) Pty Ltd v Todd and others (No. 2) PC 21-Jul-2004
PC (New Zealand) Costs were sought against a non-party, following an earlier determination by the Board.
Held: Jurisdiction to make such an order was not complete. Where the order sought was against a . .
Cited – Metalloy Supplies Ltd (In Liquidation) v MA (UK) Ltd CA 7-Oct-1996
A costs order against liquidator of company in litigation is only rarely to be given. The court should ask who is the ‘real’ party to the litigation.
Millett LJ said: ‘[An order] may be made in a wide variety of circumstances where the third . .
Cited – Taylor v Pace Developments CA 1991
Lloyd LJ said: ‘There is only one immutable rule in relation to costs, and that is that there are no immutable rules.’
Lloyd LJ baulked at the suggestion that every director who funded and controlled litigation on behalf of an insolvent company . .
Cited – Floods of Queensferry Ltd and Another v Shand Construction Ltd and others CA 29-May-2002
An application had been made for a non-party costs order against a director of the company claimant. . .
Cited – Arkin v Borchard Lines Ltd and others CA 26-May-2005
The court considered the costs aftermath of a huge claim undertaken on a no win no fee basis and failing. The funder of the claim complained at an award of costs against it.
Held: Those who fund litigation must accept that their risks extend . .

Cited by:

Cited – Dolphin Quays Developments Ltd v Mills and others CA 17-May-2007
The owner had agreed to sell a long lease of an apartment to the defendant. Part of the price was to be by way of set off of an existing debt, but ths was not set out in the contract. The claimant bought the land and the benfit of the contract from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236338

Brown v MCASSO Music Productions: CA 10 Nov 2005

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1546, [2006] 3 Costs LR 404

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust etc CA 11-May-2004
The court considered the effect on costs orders of a refusal to take part in alternate dispute resolution procedures. The defendant Trust had refused to take the dispute to a mediation. In neither case had the court ordered or recommended ADR.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235928

Andre Agassi v S Robinson (H M Inspector of Taxes) (No 2): CA 2 Dec 2005

The taxpayer had been represented in proceedings throughout by tax law experts, Tenon Media, who were not legally admitted, but had a right to conduct litigation under the 1990 Act. The Inspector objected to paying costs as if the representatives were admitted.
Held: Someone acting through the licensed access schemes was not a litigant in person. However the guidance noted that under the scheme: ‘. . . any litigation will have to be conducted on the basis that the litigant is a litigant in person.’ Though he ws able to recover some disbursements, he was not able to recover the general profit costs of those he had employed.

Judges:

Booke LJ, Dyson LJ, Carnwath LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1507, Times 22-Dec-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Solicitors Act 1974 20, Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 17, Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Jonathan Alexander Ltd v Proctor CA 19-Dec-1995
A company represented in proceedings by a director is not a litigant in person, and therefore has no expenses or costs claimable from the other party.
Hirst LJ said: ‘. . the ordinary meaning, as I understand it, of the description ‘litigant . .
See Also – Agassi v Robinson (Inspector of Taxes) CA 19-Nov-2004
. .
Cited – Gregory and Gregory v Turner, Turner; Regina (Morris) v North Somerset Council CA 19-Feb-2003
The parties were involved in a boundary dispute. One granted an enduring power of attorney, and sought to appear as a litigant in person through the power.
Held: The right of a litigant in person to represent himself was a personal right, and . .
Cited – The Law Society of the United Kingdom v Waterlow Brothers and Layton HL 1883
There was a claim that there had been a breach of section 2 of the 1843 Act by law stationers (who had had various dealings with the Probate registry under the supervision of solicitors). The Rules of the Probate Court required applications for . .
Cited – In re Ainsworth, ex parte the Law Society 1905
An unqualified person who gives notice of appearance is thereby acting in contravention of section 2 of the 1843 Act. The relevant rule of court required a notice of appearance to be given either by the defendant himself or his solicitor. . .

Cited by:

Se Also – Agassi v Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes HL 17-May-2006
The tax payer played tennis and was paid sums for when he played in England. The sums were paid to his overseas based company.
Held: The revenue’s appeal succeeded. The ‘legislative intendment in relation to sections 555 and 556, and their . .
mentioned – Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Admn 14-Oct-2009
The company had obtained legal advice but had taken it from their accountants. The Revenue sought its disclosure, and the company said that as legal advice it was protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: The material was not protected. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235535

Burstein v Times Newspapers Ltd: SCCO 28 Nov 2002

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 9037 (Costs)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main Judgment – Burstein v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 20-Dec-2000
Where a defendant in a defamation action sought to reduce the damages payable by arguing that the claimant had a reduced or damaged reputation, he could include evidence about particular facts only where these were directly connected to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235598

Kiam v MGN Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2002

The defendants appealed against the award by a jury of andpound;105,000 to the claimant for libel. Some time before the appeal was due to be heard the claimant offered to accept andpound;75,000, and to return the additional andpound;30,000, plus appropriate interest, a proposal which the appellants simply ignored.
The Court of Appeal, by a majority, dismissed the appeal on the merits, and affirmed the award of andpound;105,000 damages. The question then arose as to whether, in those circumstances, the claimant was entitled to his costs of the appeal on the indemnity basis, rather than on the standard basis. The Court of Appeal considered Petrotrade Inc v Texaco Ltd, McPhilemy v Times Newspapers Ltd and Reid Minty (A Firm) v Taylor, and considered that the award of indemnity costs did, notwithstanding some of the dicta in those cases, carry some stigma, and held that it would be a rare case indeed where a refusal of a settlement offer would attract not merely an adverse order for costs, but such an order on the indemnity rather than the standard basis. Accordingly, the Court of Appeal unanimously refused the claimant’s application for costs to be assessed on the indemnity basis, though it seems that they may well have been strongly influenced by the fact that the minority Judge would only have awarded andpound;60,000 damages.

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 9018 (Costs)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235579