Author name: Simon Gibbs

The extension of Fixed Recoverable Costs sets the level of recoverable costs for both claimants and defendants. Where the claimant wins, the claimant’s costs are set by reference to the damages as agreed/awarded (see CPR 45.45(1)(a)(iv) and CPR 45.50(2)(b)(iv)). It is the settlement value which is determinative. The position is very different when the defendant […]

There is no doubt that the rules allow a court on detailed assessment to limit a party’s recoverable costs to those that would have been applicable to a particular track even if the matter settled pre-allocation. That is what CPR 46.13(3) expressly provides for: “Where the court is assessing costs on the standard basis of

One of the likely future battlegrounds arising from the extension of Fixed Recoverable Costs is the issue of what complexity band a matter should be assigned to. The natural assumption is that claimants will seek to have matters assigned to higher complexity bands (where the recoverable costs will be higher), whereas defendants will seek to

A recent post commented on problems with the drafting of the transitional provisions concerning Fixed Recoverable Costs. The latest Minutes from the Civil Procedure Rules Committee recognises this issue: “It was NOTED that a recent article had given rise to a concern in relation to the transitional provisions within the amending statutory instrument (SI) and

The indemnity principle does not apply in relation to fixed recoverable costs (as per Butt v Nizami [2006] EWHC 159 (QB)). This has become increasingly important with the extension of fixed recoverable costs from 1 October 2023. In the past, the importance of this was often in the context of considering whether there was an