Claim for costs in family case reduced by 90% due to disproportionality
September 29, 2016
A recent decision in the High Court has highlighted the importance of giving due consideration to the proportionality of the costs being incurred in a case against the legal issues involved. To read more, please Click Here.
Erroneous CFA letter results in costs order
September 29, 2016
A recent decision in the County Court has highlighted the importance of accuracy in the information Solicitors provide regarding funding arrangements. In this instance, an erroneous representation made to the Defendants regarding a funding arrangement has lead to a Costs Order being made against the Claimant. To read more, please Click Here.
How Part 36 Offers affect Provisional Assessment Costs Cap
August 21, 2016
The Effect of Legal Aid reductions on the viability of High Street Firms is implicitly recognised by the Courts:
On the 28th April 2016, Mr. Justice Hayden, handing down Judgment in the case of R (on the application of Sino) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 803 (Admin) noted at para. 28 that:
”the appellate courts have expressed concern at the prospect that those lawyers who practise in publicly funded work, often taking on challenging points on behalf of individuals to whom neither the profession nor the public would be instinctively sympathetic, might not be able to recover remuneration at inter parties rates in cases where they were essentially successful. The real risk is that publicly funded practises would soon be unsustainable and access to justice compromised more widely. In my judgement, this is a factor which can and ought properly to be taken into account”
Mr. Justice Hayden ordered that the Defendant pay 60% of the Claimant’s costs, reductions being made on a broad brush basis to reflect the extent to which the Claimant was not successful, making the cautionary observation that:
“they (the principles addressed) do not eclipse the obligation on a party to cut his litigation objectives according to his evidential cloth. Even where important principles of the kind in contemplation here are concerned, this primary rule of litigation must serve as a brake on committed and well intentioned litigation”
This decision, together with the decision in Broadhurst v Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94 (wherein it was held that a Claimant in cases governed by CPR 45 section III who has achieved an entitlement to indemnity costs by making a successful Part 36 offer in accordance with 36.14(3) is entitled to full assessed costs and not fixed costs from the date of the expiry of the acceptance of the offer), provides some welcome relief to High Street practitioners who have been reeling from the twin assault of LASPO and Jackson since 2013. One can only live in hope that the rest of 2016 shall see some more well overdue and welcome good news.
To read more, please Click Here.
The Application of Proportionality in Costs Bills
August 21, 2016
A decision by a Senior Costs Judge shows how the application of the “Proportionality Tests” brought about by the Jackson reforms can impact on bills. To read more, please Click Here.
The Importance of Clarity on Interim Bills
August 21, 2016
A decision made by Master Gordon-Saker in a recent case has highlighted the importance of providing detailed invoices to a Client throughout the retainer, not just at the end. For more information, please Click Here.
