Orchard v South Eastern Electricity Board: CA 1987

The threat of applications for a wasted costs order should not be used to intimidate, but if one side considers that the other to have behaved in an improper, unreasonable or negligent way and likely to cause a waste of costs, it is not objectionable to alert the other side to that view. Drawing the distinction between unacceptable intimidation and acceptable notice must depend on the professional judgment of those involved.

[1987] QB 565, [1987] 1 All ER 95, [1987] 2 WLR 102
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 . .
CitedConnolly-Martin v Davis CA 27-May-1999
A claim was brought by a party against counsel for his opponent who had gone beyond his authority in giving an undertaking for his client.
Held: The claim had no prospect of success, and had been struck out correctly. Counsel offering to the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.181823