The claim concerned the plaintiffs claim for costs having represented the defendant successfully. They delivered a bill which detailed disbursements, and gave a 14 line narrative, but no other detail. The defendant requested more detail, being unaware as to the consequences as to a gross sum or bill containing detailed items. Was his request a request for more details of the gross sum bill, or for a bill containing detailed items?
Held: The question must be looked at as to the substance of the request made. The intimation of taking the matter to taxation was a reference to the existing bill, not a request for a new one. The plaintiffs might have been better advised to seek clarification of the defendant’s request. However in this case the request was for a detailed bill, and the case must proceed on that basis with the risk if an increased charge to the defendant.
Judges:
Lord Justice Pill, Sir John Vinelott
Citations:
[1998] EWCA Civ 750
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – In re Taxation of Costs In re Solicitors 1943
. .
Cited – Carlton v Theodore Goddard and Co ChD 1973
A solicitor sought to rely on a letter from his client as justifying the presentation of a new and larger bill.
Held: ‘there is the question whether the plaintiff ever required the defendants to deliver to him in lieu of the gross sum bill ‘a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Legal Professions, Costs
Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.144228
