Uncategorised

I have written before about the dangers of relying on case summaries (particularly those that appear on-line) without actually reading the full judgment. A prime example of this is the case of Engeham v London & Quadrant Housing Trust & Anor [2015] EWCA Civ 1530.  The problem was exacerbated by the fact that it has […]

It was only recently that the press was reporting on David Beckham’s library burning down.  He was described as being absolutely distraught. Apparently both books were destroyed and he hadn’t even finished colouring one of them in. Now matters have reached the point where Beckham’s intellectual strengths have grown to such heights that it is

Much of the commentary on Master Gordon-Saker’s recent proportionality decision in BNM v MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B13 (Costs) has understandably focused on the reductions made to the “reasonable” costs (approximately a 50% reduction).  However, almost as interesting is what was not reduced. To remind you of the figures, the Master initially assessed the costs,

Hot on the heels of Master Gordon-Saker’s proportionality decision in BNM v MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B13 (Costs) is another decision from the Senior Courts Costs Office, this time from Master Rowley in Dr Brian May v Wavell Group Plc. Here, the figures are even starker in terms of the reductions applied.  The initial assessment,

I’m delighted to announce that Gibbs Wyatt Stone has been named ‘Most Outstanding Law Firm of 2016, the UK’. I was notified of this via an email from a Mandeep Singh from Wealth & Finance INTL magazine (no, I hadn’t either) advising that: “following months of research by our in-house research team, Gibbs Wyatt Stone

The Master of the Rolls Lord Dyson has recently spoken out at his shock that there is a need for appeal judges: “Well paid judges at first instance should be able to get it right first time, every time.  The fact that so many fail to do so causes parties to have to incur substantial

The issue of rights of audience at detailed assessment has reared its head again. This was prompted by The Personal Injuries Bar Association, with the support of the Bar Council, writing to the CPRC over their concerns that solicitor’s agents – usually unregistered barristers – were increasingly being used to conduct advocacy in open court

Our latest Costs Law Update on the important decision in BNM v MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B13 (Costs), where a “reasonable” bill was “slashed” by 50% on the basis of the new proportionality test is now available.

The 2016/17 edition of the Costs & Fees Encyclopaedia has recently been published.  It describes itself as the “comprehensive compendium of costs and fees for civil and criminal lawyers”. This is a reference book entirely devoid of commentary and its value to potential readers can really only be judged by describing the contents.  The book

Email received asking me to complete online survey.  Among the questions asked: “Do you currently have access to the internet, email, own computer? Select all that apply. Own Computer Internet Email None” I wonder how many completing this answered “None”.