Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Costs - From: 1999 To: 1999

This page lists 89 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.

 
AEI Redifusion Ltd v PPL [1999] 1 WLR 1507
1999


Costs
The court described the appellate function in relation to the exrecise of judicial discretion on costs. Held: "Before the court can interfere it must be shown that the judge has either erred in principle in his approach or has left out of account or has taken into account some feature that he should, or should not, have considered, or that his decision was wholly wrong because the Court is forced to the conclusion that he has not balanced the various factors fairly in the scale".
1 Citers



 
 Upton v Taylor and Colley; 1999 - [1999] BPIR 168
 
Regina v The South Devon Magistrates Court ex parte Hallett CCO/3786/99
1999
Admn
Judge LJ, Wright J
Magistrates, Costs
The costs assessor had refused costs for counsel on the grounds that they were unreasonably incurred because the case was not sufficiently grave. Held. There was nothing in the statutory language to justify the adoption of such a high test of reasonableness. The issue was not whether cheaper representation could have been obtained, but whether the representation in fact secured was reasonable.
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 16(6)
1 Citers


 
Christie v Angus Wilson John McVicar, Alexside Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 552
13 Jan 1999
CA

Defamation, Costs
The second defendant appealed an order that he pay the costs of the claimant in his successful defamation action. The action had been decided by a jury rejecting the assertion that the claimant an athlete had used drugs. Held: There was no justification for a suggestion that nominal damages alone might have been ordered, and therefore no proper challenge to the costs order.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Wiggins v Richard Read (Transport) Ltd Times, 14 January 1999; Gazette, 27 January 1999
14 Jan 1999
CA

Costs
When deciding to order costs against a non-party, it was not enough to identify the non-party closely with a party, but must follow all the guidelines set out in Symphony. The White Book note 62/2/7 is inadequate in its description of the rules.
1 Cites


 
Larksworth Investments Limited v Temple House Limited Kevin John Beach [1999] EWCA Civ 593
18 Jan 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Gillian Elizabeth Hodge v Leslie Amanda Barry [1999] EWCA Civ 611
20 Jan 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
London Borough of Southwark v Nejad and others Times, 28 January 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 628
21 Jan 1999
CA

Costs
The availability of a system for allowing extensions of time for taxation of bills of costs meant that a court had other means of penalising the delaying party than refusal of leave. The judge should not adopt a mechanistic approach but seek to stay fair.
[ Bailii ]
 
Society of Lloyd's v Sir William Otho Jaffray (No. 1) [1999] 1 All ER (Comm); [1999] Lloyd's Rep. I.R. 182
22 Jan 1999
ComC
Colman J
Costs
The practice of staying a claim or counterclaim until a prior costs order against the plaintiff or counter claimant and in favour of the defendant has been complied with applies only where the prosecution of the claim or counterclaim involves needless procedural duplication.

 
Practice Direction (Supreme Court: Costs) Times, 03 February 1999
3 Feb 1999
LCJ

Costs
In interim applications in the High Court and County Court taking less than one day, and save in Family matters, the court will now by default make an order for costs and summarily assess the costs payable in accordance with this direction.

 
A Tobin v B Gwyther [1999] EWCA Civ 734
8 Feb 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Phonographic Performance Limited v AEI Redifussion Music Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 834
19 Feb 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Stafford Crown Court ex parte Wilf Gilbert (Staffs) Limited [1999] EWHC Admin 167
22 Feb 1999
Admn

Licensing, Costs

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 In Re Andrews; CA 25-Feb-1999 - Times, 19 March 1999; Gazette, 08 April 1999; [1999] 1 WLR 1236; QBCOF 98/0522/4; [1999] EWCA Civ 864; [1999] 2 Costs LR 133; [2000] CP Rep 30
 
Jones v Vans Colina [1999] EWCA Civ 878
2 Mar 1999
CA

Litigation Practice, Costs

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
The Official Receiver v John Brunt, Paul Derek Silver, Nigel Howard Nugent [1999] EWCA Civ 879
2 Mar 1999
CA

Insolvency, Company, Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others [1999] EWCA Civ 3023; [1999] BLR 232; [2000] CPLR 233
5 Mar 1999
CA
Butler-Sloss LJ, Morritt LJ, Sedley LJ
Legal Professions, Costs
The defendant's solicitors appealed an order making it liable for costs in defending an action brought by the landlord.
Supreme Court Act 1981 51(1) 51(3) 51(6)
[ Bailii ]
 
Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others and Other Actions Times, 14 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 905; [1999] BLR 232
5 Mar 1999
CA
Morritt LJ
Costs
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 circumstances. There must be a connection between the incurring of the costs and the actions of the third party.
Morritt LJ said: "Ultimately the test is whether in all the circumstances it is just to exercise the power conferred by subsections (1) and (3) of section 51, Supreme Court Act 1981 to make a non-party pay the costs of the proceedings. ...[I]t will be a matter for judgment and the exercise by the judge of his discretion to decide whether the circumstances relied on are such as to make it just to order some non-party to pay the costs. Thus, as it seems to me, the exceptional case is one to be recognised by comparison with the ordinary run of cases not defined in advance by reference to any further characteristic."
Supreme Court Act 1981 51
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
James Dixon v Lancelot Guy Allgood [1999] EWCA Civ 906
5 Mar 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Liverpool Magistrates Court, Ex parte Abiaka Times, 06 May 1999; Gazette, 08 April 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 205
5 Mar 1999
QBD

Magistrates, Costs
After a bench dismissed a matter, a later bench awarded the defendant his costs. He applied for payment but was refused on basis that it was not the same bench. Held: It need not be the same bench to dismiss the charge and to order costs. Once justices have made a defendant's costs order, it is not for the clerk to ignore it. If he believed it wrong in law, he should raise it again with the bench or a reconstituted bench to alter the decision or refer it to a higher court.
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 16(1)
[ Bailii ]
 
Clifford Harris v Dr Alim Bakarr [1999] EWCA Civ 946
11 Mar 1999
CA

Costs
Application for leave to appeal against costs orders.
[ Bailii ]
 
Sarah Hougie (Formerly Known As Sarah Rabinowitz) v Laurence Kranat [1999] EWCA Civ 958
11 Mar 1999
CA
Peter Gibson, Auld LJJ
Litigation Practice, Costs
The plaintiff applied for an extension of time to file her appeal having been given leave ex parte. The defendant opposed the application. She had been awarded damages for wrongful eviction, but the level of damages awarded had been less than the sum paid in by the defendant, and so she was liable in costs. She said that the court had not taken account of a painting removed by the defendant. Her solicitors had been at fault in calculating the day on which the appeal had to be filed. Held: Leave to file the appeal out of time was given. The delay was trivial, and there had been no prejudice arising from it.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Pearless De Rougemont and Company v Stuart John Pilbrow [1999] EWCA Civ 1011; [1999] 2 FLR 139; [1999] 2 Costs LR 109; [1999] 3 All ER 355
17 Mar 1999
CA

Legal Professions, Costs
The defendant had instructed the claimant solicitors to represent him. He had asked to see a solicitor, but had in fact seen an unqualified but very experienced person whose status was not made clear to him. He later refused to pay the bill. Held. The firm had broken the practice rules. The defendant had contracted for the supply of legal services by a solicitor. Though there was nothing to suggest that he had been disadvantaged by the breach: "a firm of solicitors which is asked for a solicitor and, without telling the client that the advisor is not a solicitor, provides an advisor who is not a solicitor should not be entitled to recover anything. " The client should not be obliged to pay the bill.
[ Bailii ]
 
Dolatkhanu Gulamali Habib Damji Virani and Parin Hassan Dilgir (Administratices of the Estate of Gulamali Habib Damji Habiv Damaji) v Shamim Gulamali Virani Lilani (Otherwise Shamin Virani) [1999] EWCA Civ 1017
18 Mar 1999
CA
Tuckey LJ
Costs
Aplication for leave to appeal against refusal to order security for costs.
[ Bailii ]
 
In Re Minotaur Data Systems Ltd Times, 18 March 1999; Gazette, 24 March 1999
18 Mar 1999
CA

Costs
An official receiver acting in person and without legal representation in director disqualification proceedings was entitled to claim costs as a litigant in person. The claim would be two thirds of what might have been recovered had he been represented.
Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975 1 - Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975 1

 
Raja v Rubin and Another Times, 14 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1039; [1999] 3 All ER 72
19 Mar 1999
CA

Insolvency, Costs
Having waived his right to a dividend under a voluntary arrangement, a creditor could not object to its later variation to include other creditors, despite an absence of explicit power in the deed for this purpose. Waiver should have been made explicit.
Insolvency Act 1986 263 (3)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Alun Hughes Rowena Hughes v John Tiller Gregory Charles Baker Bennett Griffin and Partners J T Property Investments Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 1117
29 Mar 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and the Regions and Heathrow Airport Limited ex parte Brian Scott and others [1999] EWHC Admin 280
30 Mar 1999
Admn

Transport, Costs

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
William Harvey John Corbett v Newey and others [1999] EWCA Civ 1140
30 Mar 1999
CA

Costs

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Jones, Nicolson and Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and South Goucestershire Council [1999] EWHC Admin 294
13 Apr 1999
Admn

Costs
The court considered the proper costs order after the claimants discontinued judicial review proceedings.
[ Bailii ]
 
James Dixon v Lancelot Guy Allgood Times, 30 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1163
14 Apr 1999
CA

Litigation Practice, Costs
A party wishing to apply for leave to appeal against orders made on separate preliminary hearings within the same action need not issue one application for each order, but can combine them into one application. In this case the issues were related also.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Balogun v London Borough of Hackney and Express Lift Company Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 1191
16 Apr 1999
CA

Costs
Appeal against unusual costs order.
[ Bailii ]
 
Bates Wells and Braithwaite v Masroor Ahmad [1999] EWCA Civ 1198
19 Apr 1999
CA

Charity, Costs

[ Bailii ]

 
 Glenister v Rowe; CA 21-Apr-1999 - Gazette, 19 May 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1221; [2000] Ch 76
 
Diane Kay v Dick Lucien Chitolie [1999] EWCA Civ 1279
28 Apr 1999
CA

Costs
The Defendant sought to avoid paying the VAT on a costs order arguing that the bill did not show the solicitors' VAT registration number. Held: It was easily ascertainable. The VAT was payable.
[ Bailii ]
 
Bridgewater v Griffiths [2000] 1 WLR 524; [1999] EWHC B2 (QB)
29 Apr 1999
QBD
Burton J, Masters Rogers and Jaque
Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
James Dixon v Executors of Lancelot Guy Allgood Deceased [1999] EWCA Civ 1321
30 Apr 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Steel and Morris v McDonald's Corporation and Mcdonald's Restaurants Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 1319
30 Apr 1999
CA

Defamation, Costs
The respondents had achieved a substantial damages award against the appellants. The appellants said they had achieved success on two points and sought an order in their favour for the costs of those elements. Held: "The appellants have no order for costs against them and it is impossible in our view for them now to seek an order for costs in their favour when the most they could have hoped for, by reason of their partial success on this appeal, was the reduction of the order for costs against them by way of a proportional reduction. "
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Al-Ani v Shubber [1999] EWCA Civ 1363; [1999] EWCA Civ 1498
10 May 1999
CA
Lord Justice Swinton Thomas, Lord Justice Sedley
Litigation Practice, Costs
The claimant sought leave to appeal an order refusing his application for assets to be released from an injunction obtained by his former solicitors to preserve assets against their claim for costs. The court deprecated the fact that a relatively minor defamation action had been allowed to generate considerable satellite litigation. Held: the orders had been made properly and the request for leave to appeal failed.
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Camiller v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; CA 14-May-1999 - Times, 08 June 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1418
 
Sullivan v Co-operative Society Ltd Times, 19 May 1999
19 May 1999
CA

Costs
A judge was wrong to find that a party to an action in the Manchester High Court, where the events occurred and all the witnesses lived, could instruct London solicitors and recover London costs. The case was not complex and could have been handled locally.

 
Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Choudry [1999] EWHC Admin 467
20 May 1999
Admn

Litigation Practice, Costs, Legal Aid

[ Bailii ]
 
Ogilvy Group (Holdings) Ltd v Fondital Fonderie Italiane Nuova Valsabbia Ltd et Al Times, 21 May 1999
21 May 1999
QBD

Costs
Where a party writes to the other, offering to fix costs without taxation, the existence and content of that letter, can be referred to at the conclusion of the taxation in order to assist the court in allocating the costs of the taxation.

 
Heyes and Heyes v Westonk Plc (Formerly Countrywide Group Limited) [1999] EWCA Civ 1508
27 May 1999
CA

Licensing, Costs

[ Bailii ]

 
 Bajwa v British Airways plc; Whitehouse v Smith; Wilson v Mid Glamorgan Council and Sheppard; CA 28-May-1999 - Times, 01 July 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1519
 
Nordstern Allgemeine Versicherungs Ag v Internav Ltd; Same v Katsamas and An Times, 08 June 1999
8 Jun 1999
CA

Costs
The power to order costs against a non-party was not dependant upon the court having first made an order for costs in the proceedings against one or other of the parties. The financial interest of a third party in the proceedings had to be carefully considered, but might be wider than champerty.
Supreme Court Act 1981

 
Nordstern Allgemeine Versicherungs Ag v Internav Ltd; Same v Katsamas and An Gazette, 09 June 1999
9 Jun 1999
CA

Costs
The power to order costs against a non-party was not dependant upon the court having first made an order for costs in the proceedings against one or other of the parties. The financial interest of a third party in the proceedings had to be carefully considered, but might be wider than champerty.
Supreme Court Act 1981

 
M J Benyon and others v David Scadden and others Gazette, 10 November 1999; [1999] IRLR 700; EAT/1269/98; [1999] UKEAT 1269 - 98 - 1406
14 Jun 1999
EAT
The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay
Employment, Costs
The tribunal had found that the claimants and their union had pursued their case, even though they recognised the weakness of the case, with the additional intention of persuading their employer to recognise their union, UNISON. Such behaviour was an abuse of the Industrial Tribunal system, and it was proper to reflect that misbehaviour in an award for costs.
EAT Procedural Issues - Employment Tribunal
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v MJ Reilly (Solicitors) [1999] EWCA Crim 1632
14 Jun 1999
CACD

Crime, Legal Professions, Costs
The applicant firm had been subject to a wasted costs order for a negligent assessment of the length of a trial. Held: The estimate had proved correct. The order was set aside.

 
Regina v Northallerton Magistrates, ex parte Dove Times, 17 June 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 499; [2000] 1 Cr App R (S) 136
17 Jun 1999
QBD
Lord Bingham CJ
Criminal Practice, Costs
The defendant having provided sufficient evidence of his means, a court awarding prosecution costs, where the other penalty is a fine, should not allow these to be completely disproportionate to the fine. Where a defendant failed to provide sufficient information the justices were entitled to draw reasonable inferences about what they might be. Costs orders are not to be used to punish the defendant for exercising his right to defend himself. Lord Bingham C : "While there is no requirement that any sum ordered by justices to be paid to a prosecutor by way of costs should stand in any arithmetical relationship to any fine imposed, the costs ordered to be paid should not in the ordinary way be grossly disproportionate to the fine".
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 18
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions and Vale of White Horse District Council ex parte Bernard John Panton [1999] EWCA Civ 1658
23 Jun 1999
CA

Planning, Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Goodacre v Bates etc [1999] EWCA Civ 1724
1 Jul 1999
CA

Defamation, Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Hepworth Building Products v Coal Authority Times, 09 July 1999; Gazette, 20 October 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1749
2 Jul 1999
CA

Costs, Land
An offer to settle, expressly open only until the first day of the hearing at the Lands Tribunal could have no significance in the context of a re-hearing ordered by the Court of Appeal some years later. The early offer including the limitation had not been revived, and had no continuing effect in costs.
Lands Tribunal Rules 1996 (1996 No 1022)
[ Bailii ]
 
Goodkind and Goodkind v Meiklejohn [1999] EWCA Civ 1778
6 Jul 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]

 
 Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No 3); ChD 8-Jul-1999 - Gazette, 11 August 1999; Times, 28 September 1999; [1999] EWHC 834 (Ch)
 
Mars Uk Ltd v Teknowledge Ltd (No 2) Gazette, 11 August 1999; Times, 08 July 1999
8 Jul 1999
ChD

Costs
Where a hearing had been in part successful for both parties an award of interim costs was appropriate, suitably reduced to be an amount reasonably payable in advance of formal assessment by taxation. A party who had sought to resolve the matter by negotiation should have that reflected in their favour when making the order.

 
Hall v Hall [1999] EWCA Civ 1829
14 Jul 1999
CA

Family, Costs

[ Bailii ]

 
 Goodger and Goodger v Willis and Watts; CA 15-Jul-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 1859

 
 General Mediterranean Holdings SA v Patel and Another; QBD 19-Jul-1999 - Times, 12 August 1999; Gazette, 11 August 1999; [1999] EWHC 832 (Comm); [1999] Lloyds Rep PN 919; [1999] 2 Costs LR 10; [2000] 1 WLR 272; [1999] 3 All ER 673; [2000] UKHRR 273; [1999] PNLR 852; [2000] HRLR 54; [1999] CPLR 425
 
Nationwide Building Society v Various Solicitors Gazette, 08 September 1999; [1999] 20 July Unreported
20 Jul 1999
ChD

Costs
The case draws a distinction in group and consolidated actions between costs incurred on the general points which have been common to the parties and which brought the actions together and costs incurred in dealing with matters specific to the separate particular matters which had been brought together.
1 Citers


 
Ayobiojo v McGoldrick [1999] EWCA Civ 1938
23 Jul 1999
CA

Costs
Application for leave to appeal against order refusing injunctions supporting security for costs - application hopeless.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In the Matter of an Application for Costs Against Legal Aid Board; Lancashire Fires Ltd v S A Lyons and Co Ltd and Others (No 2) Times, 23 July 1999; Gazette, 28 July 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1718
23 Jul 1999
CA

Legal Aid, Costs
An application for payment of a successful party's costs out of the Legal Aid Fund should normally be made at the end of a trial, but it might well be made later when it proved impossible to recover costs against other parties to the action. In this case the delay did prevent it being just and equitable to make the order.
Legal Aid Act 1974 18

 
Clark; Parmenter (Administrators of the Estate of Peter Dennis Fulljames Deceased) v Rice (Sued Personally and In her Capacity As Surviving Executor of the Estate of Coral Lynette Letts Deceased) ; Raymond [1999] EWCA Civ 1974
26 Jul 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
In Re Sternberg Reed Taylor and Gill (A Firm) Times, 26 July 1999; Gazette, 11 August 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 1870
26 Jul 1999
CACD

Criminal Practice, Legal Professions, Costs
Negligence on the part of a solicitor was capable of falling within the range of 'unnecessary or improper act or omission' so as to leave him open to a wasted costs order. A clerk, having stood near the place where the jury assembled, discussed the case with the defendant. A re-trial was necessary, and could easily have been avoided.
Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986 (1986 No 1335) 3(c)
[ Bailii ]
 
Gary Alan Burt v Montague Wells (a Firm) [1999] EWCA Civ 1959
26 Jul 1999
CA

Costs

[ Bailii ]

 
 Redland Aggregates Limited v Shephard Hill Civil Engineering Limited; CA 29-Jul-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 2028
 
Re: Howells (Solicitors) [1999] EWCA Crim 2171
5 Aug 1999
CACD

Legal Professions, Costs, Criminal Practice
Appeal Under Section 3(c) of Costs In Criminal Cases (General) (Amendment) Regulations 1991 Against a Wasted Costs Order
Costs In Criminal Cases (General) (Amendment) Regulations 1991 3(c)
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Lambeth ex parte Carmen Lee Shakes and Linda and John Touhey [1999] EWHC Admin 785
5 Aug 1999
Admn

Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Worcestershire County Council (ex parte F (L)) [1999] EWHC Admin 789
6 Aug 1999
Admn

Education, Costs

Education Act 1996
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Cardiff City Council Ex Parte Brown Gazette, 11 August 1999
11 Aug 1999
QBD

Costs
The usual rule that, for a case lasting less than one day the costs order should be assessed summarily, was to be set aside where there was any point of principle sufficient to justify further consideration. In this case, one party challenged the hourly rate charged by the in-house legal department of the respondent.
Costs Practice Direction 44

 
In Re Harry Jagdev and Co (Wasted Costs Order) (No 2 of 1999) Gazette, 02 September 1999; Times, 12 August 1999
12 Aug 1999
CA

Costs, Legal Professions, Criminal Practice
A wasted costs order must specify the amount payable when it is made. It is not open to a judge to go back later and amend the order to correct the defect, and particularly not to do so by awarding a sum greater than the amount claimed. In this case in any event, the award had been at best borderline, the costs incurred had contributed to the swifter disposal of the case.
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 19A - Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986 (1986 No 1335)


 
 Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, ex parte O'Byrne; Admn 20-Aug-1999 - Times, 12 November 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 811
 
Little and Others v George Little Sebire and Co [1999] EWHC B8 (QB)
29 Sep 1999
QBD
David Foskett QC
Costs
Rulings on costs and on applications for permission to appeal
[ Bailii ]
 
Comninos v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer no 2) [1999] EWCA Civ 3019; [2000] 1 All ER 37; [1999] 2 All ER (Comm) 673; [2000] 1 Lloyd's Rep 129; [2000] 1 WLR 603; [2000] Lloyd's Rep IR 230; [2000] CLC 22; [2000] 1 Costs LR 37; [2000] CP Rep 13; [2000] ILPr 490
12 Oct 1999
CA
Simon Brown LJ, Waller LJ, Tuckey LJ
Litigation Practice, Costs, Jurisdiction
Mr Comninos challenged the jurisdiction of the court to have made an order for costs made against him.
Supreme Court Act 1981 51
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
National Justice Compania Naviera Sa v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (No 2) Gazette, 27 October 1999; Times, 15 October 1999; Gazette, 03 November 1999; [2000] 1 WLR 603; [2000] 1 All ER 37; [1999] 2 All ER (Comm) 673; [2000] 1 Lloyd's Rep 129; [2000] CP Rep 13; [2000] CLC 22; [2000] 1 Costs LR 37; [2000] IL Pr 490; [2000] Lloyd's Rep IR 230; (1999) 149 NLJ 1561; Independent, 20 October 1999; Independent, 22 November 1999
15 Oct 1999
CA

Jurisdiction, Costs
An English court does have power to order a non-resident non-party to contribute to the costs of a case, where that party was domiciled in a convention country. Here the third party was alleged to be the alter ego of the actual party. There was no requirement to have sued that third party first under any convention entered into by the UK.
Supreme Court Act 1981 51 - Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (1968) (Cmnd 7395)
1 Cites



 
 Customs and Excise v Anchor Foods Ltd (No.4); ChD 18-Oct-1999 - [1999] EWHC 835 (Ch)

 
 Federal Bank of the Middle East Limited v Charles Hadkinson and Others; ChD 20-Oct-1999 - Times, 07 December 1999; Gazette, 25 November 1999; [1999] EWHC Ch 201

 
 Federal Bank of the Middle East Limited v Charles Hadkinson and Others; ChD 20-Oct-1999 - Times, 07 December 1999; Gazette, 25 November 1999; [1999] EWHC Ch 201
 
Regina v Bedlington Magistrates' Court, ex parte Wilkinson Unreported, 21 October 1999; CO/0900/99
21 Oct 1999
Admn
Moses J, Tuckey LJ
Criminal Practice, Costs
In addition to assessment of his solicitor's bill of costs, the acquitted defendant claimed £3,971.50 as "the costs of a specialist graphics contractor" who had been instructed and paid directly by the defendant. Held: Moses J stated: "It does not follow that, because a solicitor has claimed costs and disbursements, that will necessarily rule out other expenses and disbursements having been incurred by the litigant himself." The matter was remitted for reconsideration of whether the item had been "properly incurred" in the particular circumstances of the case.
1 Citers


 
Ford v GKR Construction and Others Times, 05 November 1999; [2000] 1 All ER 802; [1999] EWCA Civ 3030
22 Oct 1999
CA
Judge LJ, Woolf MR
Costs, Civil Procedure Rules
Where a party wished to put the other at risk of payment of costs by the making of an offer, it was vital that the other party should be made properly aware of any information available to decide on the offer. Under the new regime, it was not appropriate to hold back such information, and a party who did so risked losing his costs even if the payment in would otherwise meet the criteria. The Claimant recovered less damages than the amount of the payment into Court, but the Defendants were ordered to pay the whole of the Claimant's costs, including those incurred after the date of the payment in. Held: "the judge reaching his decision about costs is required to take into account all relevant aspects of the litigation." The order was justified in the circumstances of that case, in particular because of the late introduction of evidence by the Defendants which had the effect of reducing the amount of the judgment below that of the payment in. "Indeed, [the judge's] judgment has served to underline [not "undermine"] the importance, rightly and increasingly, to be attached to civil litigation being conducted openly between the parties with the real issues between them efficiently and quickly identified and investigated without, as it now seems to me, any unfairness to these defendants in this case." (Woolf MR) "I also draw attention to the fact that the rules refer to the power of the court to make other orders and make it clear that the normal cost consequences of failing to beat the sum paid in does not apply when it is unjust that it should do so. If a party has not enabled another party to properly assess whether or not to make an offer, or whether or not to accept an offer which is made, because of non-disclosure to the other party of material matters, or if a party comes to a decision which is different from that which would have been reached if there had been proper disclosure, that is a material matter for the court to take into account in considering what orders it should make." Judge LJ: "Civil litigation is now developing into a system designed to enable the parties involved to know where they stand in reality at the earliest possible stage, and at the lowest practicable cost, so that they .... may make informed decisions about their prospects and the sensible conduct of their cases. Among other factors the judge exercising his discretion about costs should consider is whether one side or the other has, or has not, conducted litigation with those principles in mind."
Civil Procedure Rules 36
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Robertson Research International Ltd v ABG Exploration BV et al Times, 03 November 1999
3 Nov 1999
QBD

Costs
It was proper to order costs against a non-party, where the losing party had merely been a front man. The rule is necessary to protect those who take a proper part in litigation whether as claimant or respondent should not be faced artificially with a man of straw.

 
Mooney v Cardiff Justices Gazette, 03 November 1999; Times, 17 November 1999
3 Nov 1999
QBD

Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Costs
Where a prosecution was discontinued and the defendant applied for his costs, the court should need to hear oral evidence before deciding whether his actions had brought the complaint upon himself. It was proper to hear and rely upon prosecution material, but should look for some independent element supporting an allegation.

 
Cripps v Heritage Distribution Corporation and Others Times, 10 November 1999; Gazette, 17 November 1999
10 Nov 1999
CA

Costs
It was proper to take into account the surrounding circumstances when considering the making of an order for the giving of security of costs against a plaintiff resident abroad. The underlying purpose of such orders had to be allowed for. Here, linked cases meant that a success against one party would mean also success against another, and the need for security for costs in the increased sum requested was not supported.

 
Jones v Jones Times, 11 November 1999
11 Nov 1999
CA

Personal Injury, Costs
A plaintiff in a personal injury action who did not accept a payment in, and continued, took the risk of costs inherent in such a continuance. She was entitled to costs up to the date of payment in only, and not up to a later date when different medical evidence came to be relied upon.


 
 Wells and Another v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council; Leeds City Council v Carr; QBD 12-Nov-1999 - Times, 12 November 1999; Gazette, 17 December 1999
 
Geraghty and Co v Awwad and Another [1999] EWCA Civ 3002; [1999] EWCA Civ 3036; [2001] QB 570; [2000] 3 WLR 1041; [2000] 1 All ER 608; [2000] 1 Costs LR 105
25 Nov 1999
CA
Schiemann LJ, May LJ, LCJ
Legal Professions, Costs
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 law developments in this field. Now that Parliament had modified the law which had prohibited all arrangements for receiving a contingency fee in relation to litigation services, there was no room for the court to go beyond that which Parliament had now permitted.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Hazlett v Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council [2000] 4 All ER 887; [2001] 1 Costs LR 89
2 Dec 1999
QBD
Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ and Harrison J
Legal Professions, Costs, Litigation Practice
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 complainant can rely on the presumption in his favour. The defendant must raise a genuine issue as to whether the complainant is liable for his solicitors’ costs before the complainant has to adduce evidence to show that his entitlement. The complainant is presumed to be personally liable for his solicitors’ costs and it should not normally be necessary for the complainant to have to adduce evidence to that effect.
Harrison J said: "there is normally a presumption that the complainant will be personally liable for his solicitors' costs and it should not normally be necessary for the complainant to have to adduce evidence to that effect." and
"Where, however, there is a genuine issue raised by the defendant as to whether the complainant has properly incurred costs in the proceedings, the position will be different. A defendant may, for instance, have grounds for believing that the complainant will not be liable to pay his solicitor's costs, whether because he has entered into an unlawful and unenforceable conditional fee arrangement with his solicitor or for any other reason. In those circumstances, where the defendant has raised a genuine issue as to whether the complainant has properly incurred costs in the proceedings, the complainant will be at risk if he continues to rely on the presumption that he is liable for his solicitor's costs. If he does not then adduce evidence to prove that he has properly incurred costs in the proceedings and the defendant can show by evidence or argument, that he has not, he would be most unlikely to succeed in recovering his costs.
The need for a complainant to give evidence to prove his entitlement to costs rather than relying on the presumption in his favour will not, however, arise if the defendant simply puts the complainant to proof of his entitlement to costs. The complainant would be justified in relying on the presumption in his favour. It would be necessary for the defendant to raise a genuine issue as to whether the complainant is liable for his solicitors' costs before the complainant would be called upon to adduce evidence to show that he is entitled to his costs. It will be for the trial judge to decide whether or not the defendant has raised an issue which calls for proof by the complainant of his liability to costs. Prior notice of the issue to be raised by the defendant should be given to the complainant in sufficient time before the hearing to enable the complainant to deal with it properly at the hearing and to avoid the necessity of an adjournment at the defendant's expense." and
"the mere non-acceptance by a defendant that an agreement between the complainant and his solicitor is a proper private fee agreement would not of itself be sufficient to call for evidence from the complainant. The defendant must show that there is a genuine reason for believing that it is not a proper private fee agreement before the complainant should need to consider adducing evidence to support the presumption in his favour."
1 Citers


 
Amec Process and Energy Ltd v Stork Engineers and Contractors Bv (A Company Registered In the Netherlands) [1999] EWHC Technology 188
7 Dec 1999
TCC

Costs
Costs - Preliminary issues - Claimant predominantly successful - Whether costs should follow event of preliminary issues or be reserved because of the possibility of there having been a payment into court.
[ Bailii ]
 
Greening and Another (Trading As Automania) v Williams Times, 10 December 1999
10 Dec 1999
CA

Litigation Practice, Costs
In order to establish a plea of tender before, the defendant had, in addition to making the actual payment into court, also to serve on the claimant the formal notice required under the rules to say that the payment had been made. In the absence of such, he achieved no protection form an award of costs. Notification by means of the pleadings in the action was not sufficient.
Rules of the Supreme Court Ord 18 R 16

 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.