Gupta v Comer: CA 1991

The plaintiff applied for an Order that costs be paid personally by the defendant’s solicitors on the basis that the solicitors had incurred such costs unreasonably and had failed to conduct the proceedings with reasonable competence and expedition. The solicitors objected to an Order being, saying that the Court had no jurisdiction to make such an Order unless serious dereliction of duty by the solicitor could be established.
Held: The solicitors’ appeal against an order that certain costs be paid personally by them failed, and the Order had been properly made even though the solicitors had not been guilty of serious dereliction of duty or gross negligence or neglect. The purpose of making a wasted costs order against a solicitor in pursuance of this rule is compensatory and not punitive.

[1991] 2 WLR 494, [1991] 1 QB 629, [1991] 1 All ER 289
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRidehalgh 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.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.279000