Judge refers claims firm to SRA after disallowing 99% of costs claimed
July 24, 2023
A Deputy District Judge reduced claimed costs of £14,000 to just £68 on a personal injury claim and referred the company to the SRA. It was determined that the profit costs should be reduced by 99% as the firm “had failed to perform its’ retainer appropriately”. To read the full article click here https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/claims-firm-referred-to-sra-after-costs-cut-by-99/5116679.article?
Firm unable to recover £234,000 budget overspend
July 24, 2023
A Costs Judge has ruled that the firm cannot recover the shortfall from the Claimant’s damages in a multi-million pound case as it failed to keep the Claimant’s litigation friend informed of increased costs during the course of the claim. To read the full article click here https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/firm-told-it-cannot-recover-234000-costs-shortfall-from-claimant/5116551.article?
Tip of the month
June 13, 2023
Is all work within scope? Are all aspects and applications covered? Is the final hearing covered? Remember to amend the certificate for appeals.
Claim of £25,000 for instructing leading counsel disallowed
June 13, 2023
A Costs Judge disallowed £25,000 claimed for instructing leading counsel saying that the addition of a KC was neither reasonable nor proportionate and warned that parties cannot expect to recover “unlimited” costs. The claimant’s solicitors appointed leading counsel and junior counsel in the industrial disease case, the judge disallowed leading counsel’s fees altogether and reduced the fees of junior counsel. To read the full article click here https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/court-disallows-25000-claimed-for-instructing-leading-counsel/5116181.article?
Costs bills based on estimated times found to be “intentionally misleading”
June 13, 2023
A Senior Costs Judge ruled that virtually all the times claimed in each of nine bills had been estimated with no evidence in the files that the work had been done. The judge concluded that in signing the bills the solicitor had acted both unreasonably and improperly. It was ordered that the claimant’s total costs be reduced by 40% and that they were to pay 75% of the defendant’s costs of the detailed assessment proceedings. For more information click here https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/costs-bills-based-entirely-on-estimates-intentionally-misleading/5115964.article?
