Legal Costs

The statement of truth used to verify a costs budget will change from 22 April 2014 to: “This budget is a fair and accurate statement of incurred and estimated costs which it would be reasonable and proportionate for my client to incur in this litigation.” This amendment was presumably made to deal with some of […]

The recent decision of Costs Judge Master Rowley, in Burton v Cranfield Delta Whiskey Group, granting relief from sanctions, is an unusual one. The breach occurred pre-1 April 2013. Litigation Futures reported that the reasoning behind the decision was that Master Rowley said that the message sent by the Court of Appeal in Mitchell was

CPR 44.2(6)(g) states: “The orders which the court may make under this rule include an order that a party must pay interest on costs from or until a certain date, including a date before judgment.” However, the Senior Courts Costs Office Guide 2013 correctly advises: “The power to order interest to run from a date

Of the different types of order the court can make in relation to interim matters is one for “costs reserved”. PD 44 para.4.2 explains the effects of such an order: “The decision about costs is deferred to a later occasion, but if no later order is made the costs will be costs in the case.”

Replies to Points of Dispute occupy a strange place in the detailed assessment process. Many costs practitioners and costs judges have traditionally viewed them as largely a waste of time, often consisting of self-serving argument or pointless comment (eg “Not agreed”). At worst, they extend beyond setting in skeleton form the receiving party’s position and

Patrick Allen, writing in the New Law Journal, commenting on the Jackson reforms: “Many smaller PI firms are closing, selling their cases at a discount to their WIP or being taken over. Firms are being hoovered up by the mega firms such as Slater Gordon. … If firms do have cash this is because they

Notice received from court: “Take notice that the provisional assessment will take place on 7 February 2014 at 2:30pm at X County Court when you should attend 90 minutes has been allowed for the provisional assessment NB – No parties are to attend the provisional assessment hearing” That’s clear then.  

Claimant serves costs budget totalling £100,000. Defendant serves costs budget totalling £20,000. Defendant’s budget is, unsurprisingly, not disputed and approved by the court. Claimant’s budget is, unsurprisingly, hotly disputed and is dealt with at a costs management hearing. PD 3E para.2.2 states: “Save in exceptional circumstances – (1) the recoverable costs of initially completing Precedent

Practice Direction 3E – Costs Management, paragraph 2.2(1): “the recoverable costs of initially completing Precedent H shall not exceed the higher of £1,000 or 1% of the approved budget” Which of the following is included within the cap: 1. One hour discussion with the client explaining the figures within the budget and the costs consequences

The Association of Costs Lawyers recently announced the appointment of its first professional chief executive officer. The ACL announcement stated: “He will act as the focal point of the ACL’s campaign, highlighting the importance of solicitors using only fully qualified and regulated costs specialists in the costs management era.” It is interesting that the broader