Tag Archives: Costs budgeting

COSTS AT THE END OF A CASE: INDEMNITY COSTS, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT AND GOING BEYOND THE COSTS BUDGET

In Barkhuysen -v- Hamilton [2016] EWHC 3371 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered matters relating to costs after a trial. The defendant’s conduct led to an order for indemnity costs being made. The judge also identified those areas in which the claimant could, properly, claim for items outside the costs budget. “If the defendant had dealt with […]

JUDGE USES COSTS BUDGET TO ASSESS COSTS AT THE END OF A TRIAL: THE RELEVANCE OF THE BUDGET & WHEN SHOULD THE COURT GO OUTSIDE IT?

In Sony Communications International AB -v- SSH Communications Security Corporation [2016] EWHC 2985 (Pat) Mr Roger Wyand QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) used the costs budget to carry out an assessment of the costs at the end of case.   The judgment is interesting in that it (i) considers  the role of […]

TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE IV: PROPORTIONALITY – A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE V

The issue of proportionality raised its head more than once at the recent ACL conference.  However I addressed the issue directly (or perhaps obliquely). My central argument being that proportionality requires a fundamentally different approach to litigation. Further there is virtually no guidance being given to litigators. WHAT DOES PROPORTIONALITY MEAN? District Judge Besford had […]

TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE III: SATELLITE NAVIGATION, MERRIX AND COSTS BUDGETING

One issue discussed at the Association of Costs Lawyers in Manchester on the 24th October  was the decision in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWHC B28 (QB). The question of whether a detailed assessment is needed after a case has been costs budgeted. NOW ON APPEAL At the conference it was […]

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DIFFICULTY IN REVISING A BUDGET: AN ACUTE CHANGE OF CASE IS REQUIRED

I am grateful to Michael Davidson from Acumension who has sent me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Hovington in the case of Warner -v- The Pennine Acute Hospital NHS Trust  (Manchester County Court 23rd September 2016) (available here warner-v-pennine-acute-hospital-nhs-trust-23-sep-16-approved-judgment). It is a case that illustrates the difficulties in attempting to revise a budget. “‘Significant […]

THE PARTIES CANNOT CONTRACT OUT OF COSTS BUDGETING (& A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE)

An earlier post dealt with the decision of Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21.  However an earlier ruling in the same case contains a consideration of whether the parties can agree to sidestep budgeting. THE CASE The action had been transferred from the Chancery Division to the Competition Appeal […]

COSTS MANAGEMENT AND PROPORTIONALITY IN ACTION

Issues of costs budgeting and proportionality were considered by Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21. It provides an interesting example of the judicial approach to proportionality and costs budgeting. “Proportionality is fundamental to the standard basis of assessment. It is inherent in the concept of proportionality that even […]