Legal Cost Specialists
The Association of Costs Lawyers’ London Annual Costs Conference was held last Friday. One of the breakout sessions was “An Audience with Senior Costs Judge Rowley”. As entertainment goes, it was better than “An Audience with Jeremy Beadle” but not as good as “An Audience with Victoria Wood”. Each to their own. One of the […]
Does Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting apply to detailed assessment? Read More »
Last year I represented the paying partying in a detailed assessment where CPR 44.11 misconduct allegations were raised. The £258,583.78 claim for costs was assessed at £nil and the receiving party’s solicitor referred to the SRA (Kapoor v Johal, Johal & Johal [2024] EWHC 2853 (SCCO)). The case received significant coverage in the legal press. Not long
Bill of Costs reduced by 75% because of CPR 44.11 misconduct Read More »
The recent decision in Kapoor v Johal, Johal & Johal [2024] EWHC 2853 (SCCO), where a claim for costs was reduced from £258,583.78 to £0, has received a significant amount of attention, including in the Law Society Gazette, Solicitors Journal, Legal Futures, Civil Litigation Brief and Costs Lawyer Journal. I suspect that part of the interest
How to avoid being referred to the SRA Read More »
Interesting costs webinar from Gatehouse Chambers’ Costs and Litigation Funding Team examining the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in light of the recent decision in Glaser v Atay [2024] EWCA Civ 1111. That case determined that the Direct Access barristers’ terms did not comply with the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that the contract was unenforceable. The barristers were not
Retainer challenges under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 Read More »
In Oakwood Solicitors Ltd v Menzies [2024] UKSC 34 the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s earlier decision. In essence, it is not sufficient to have a retainer that allows for costs to be deducted from damages and for a final bill to be sent to the client at the conclusion of the case.
Oakwood Solicitors Ltd v Menzies Read More »
The latest twist in the long running saga of AB v Secretary of State for Justice [2023] EWHC 72 (KB) (and X v The Transcription Agency LLP & Anor [2023] EWHC 1092 (KB)) is that AB/X, who previously benefited from an anonymity order, has been revealed as high profile solicitor advocate Robin Makin, of Liverpool
Liverpool solicitor Robin Makin named as ‘AB/X’ in anonymity case Read More »
The 2023 version of the Senior Court Costs Office Guide is now available.
Senior Courts Costs Office Guide 2023 Read More »
Costs seminar from Andrew Hogan and Erica Bedford on costs and litigation funding as they apply to class actions, group litigation and representative actions including retainers, litigation funding, costs budgeting and capping, costs orders and detailed assessment.
Costs and group litigation seminar Read More »
The case of Isah, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 268 concerned: “the issue of whether a judge is permitted to order costs to be summarily assessed in a different court by a different judge or whether a summary assessment must be undertaken by the
Can one judge make a costs order and a different judge undertake the summary assessment? Read More »
A recent post looked at the arguments for and against whether Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”) applies to detailed assessment proceedings. The recent decision of Costs Judge Leonard in PME v The Scout Association [2023] EWHC 158 (SCCO) is therefore interesting. The underlying case concerned a claim for personal injury. The claim settled in the
Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (QOCS) and detailed assessment Read More »