Legal Cost Specialists
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) recently announced that it intends the extension of fixed recoverable costs in most money cases worth up to £100,000 to come into force from October 2022. This is, of course, subject to the Civil Procedure Rule Committee redrafting CPR 45 in time. This itself is a significant undertaking, particularly as […]
Extension of fixed costs Read More »
Significant costs, and much valuable court time, is taken up re-arguing identical points of principle in costs litigation due to the absence of a binding authority. So it is with the issue of the recoverability of court fees. An example is where a claimant pays court fees and subsequently seeks to recover those from the
A (minority) of electronic Bills of Costs that I see follow the Association of Costs Lawyers’ template e-bill. This Bill enables Points of Dispute to be incorporated directly into the electronic spreadsheet. For certain Bills, there may be advantages to incorporating Points of Dispute into the Bill, but I usually prepare Points of Dispute as
Points of Dispute and electronic Bills of Costs Read More »
The recent decision of Louis Dreyfus Company Suisse S.A. v International Bank of St. Petersburg (Joint-Stock Company) [2021] EWHC 1039 (Comm) contains a short passage dealing with the approach on detailed assessment where costs are to be paid on the indemnity basis. The decision was reported in Costs Law Reports. (Copies of their latest reported
Assessing costs on the indemnity basis Read More »
When is it preferable to have a costs order on the standard basis rather than on the indemnity basis? Potentially, where a costs management order has been made. CPR 3.18(b) provides: “In any case where a costs management order has been made, when assessing costs on the standard basis, the court will not depart from
Costs budgets when costs on the indemnity basis Read More »
The costs subcommittee of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) is apparently due to consider whether it should be possible to make Part 36 offers in relation to the costs of detailed assessment. This follows the recent decision of Master Leonard in Best v Luton & Dunstable Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC B2 (Costs)
As far back as 2005, Lord Justice Brooke observed in Black v Pastouna & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 1389 that: “It is incumbent on those advising parties appearing before this, or any, court to take all the steps they can in accordance with CPR Rules 1.1 and 1.3 to reduce the cost of the proceedings.
Cost of travelling to conferences Read More »
The latest podcast from the Practico “Costs chat with friends” series features Andrew Hogan and covers a number of interesting costs issues. Available via: Video – https://youtu.be/JluOwGBASyU Audio Soundcloud – https://soundcloud.com/user-144902971/2021-05-05-costs-chat-with-friends-andrew-hogan-with-jeremy-morgan-qc-and-andy-ellis Audio Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/episode/4xffxvZwu6CN2l4RbCgkc1?si=383bfae2ecbc4a3b Audio iTunes https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/practico-the-podcost-series/id1445931706#episodeGuid=tag%3Asoundcloud%2C2010%3Atracks%2F1046097754 A pleasant and convenient way to pick up some free CPD points.
The Civil Justice Council’s consultation on Guideline Hourly Rates (GHRs) ends today. One of the questions put out for consultation was whether the N260 for summary assessment and the information provided in a formal Bill of Costs for detailed assessment should require the signatory to specify the location of the fee earners who carried out
Guideline Hourly Rate Consultation Read More »
The decision of His Honour Judge Mark Pelling QC in ABS Company Ltd v Pantaenius UK Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 3720 (Comm) has already generated a certain amount of interest in relation to his comments as to the appropriate hourly rates to allow in a summary assessment. The underlying claim proceeded in the shorter
25% uplift to Guideline Hourly Rates to reflect inflation Read More »