Legal Cost Specialists

Number of Costs Judges

By on Oct 18, 2013 | 7 comments

The Senior Courts Costs Office Guide 2013 lists the current number of Costs Judges as being eight. This is the same number as listed in the 2006 Guide, although two of the judges are now different.

The 2013 Guide lists 13 Costs Officers, as opposed to the 11 listed in the 2006 Guide, although 7 are different. It is not clear whether these are all full time.

The 2006 Guide said:

“Cases assigned to a costs officer are usually given a date for hearing not more than 12 weeks later than the date the request for a hearing was filed. Cases assigned to a Costs Judge are usually given a date for hearing not more than six months later than the date upon which the request for a hearing was filed.”

The 2013 Guide says:

“Historically cases assigned to costs officers have usually been given a date for hearing not more than 12 weeks later than the date the request for a hearing was filed. Cases assigned to Costs Judges have usually been given a date for hearing not more than eight months later than the date upon which the request for a hearing was filed.”

No details are given as to whether the increase in delay in listing time for Costs Judges from six to eight months is due to an increase in the number of detailed assessment hearings, an increase in the size of the bills being lodged or a failure to stop costs advocates from waffling on endlessly.

    7 Comments

  1. Waffling advocates drive me mad. Do they think that repeatedly making the same point somehow makes their case stronger? I usually begin my response by saying that I’ll try to get the Court timetable back on track by making my point only once, which is usually met with a wry smile by the Judge.

    Pete B

    18th October 2013

  2. I bet the wafflers are unqualified (i dare not say CL word) and those jumped up costs counsel………………!

    Anonymous

    18th October 2013

  3. Always Costs Counsel in my experience.

    Anonymous

    18th October 2013

  4. Simon, methinks you forget that since the 2006 Guide, the London Courts were ordered to transfer all Assessment work to the SCCO.

    Anonymous

    18th October 2013

  5. It strikes me that the SCCO in particular have a hard-on for costs counsel. I suspect that if a costs draftsman made exactly the same argument as costs counsel, the costs counsel would get a better result.

    ticklemebills

    18th October 2013

  6. @ Ticklemebills

    Your post below should be copied into your preliminary arguments and/or grounds for appeal when up against costs counsel. Its pithy, edgy and i’m sure its never been run before in quite suh a bold manner:

    ‘It strikes me that the SCCO in particular have a hard-on for costs counsel. I suspect that if a costs draftsman made exactly the same argument as costs counsel, the costs counsel would get a better result.’

    Anonymous

    18th October 2013

  7. Anonymous – as a Costs Draftsman I will not be judged to the high standard of a Costs Lawyer so I might just do that.

    ticklemebills

    18th October 2013

Post a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.