Tag Archives: Proportional costs

REASONABLENESS AND PROPORTIONALITY: A DIRECT IMPACT UPON LITIGATION DECISIONS

I have been writing for some time about the impact of “proportionality” upon the practice of litigation itself.  One example of this can be found in the judgment of Master James in  Briggs & 598 others -v-  First Choice Holidays and Flights Limited (23/09/16). THE CASE The claimants brought an action following a holiday. 447 […]

PROPORTIONATE COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: £33,813 REDUCED TO £3,737.50

In K -v- K [2016] EWHC 2002 (Fam) Mr Justice Macdonald reduced the costs of a successful party to an appeal in a family case. “The stringent test of proportionality in relation to costs incurred applies with equal force in family proceedings. It is remarkable that such a significant sum of money has been spent […]

COSTS BUDGETING & DAVID -v- GOLIATH: DOES IT GIVE THE “LITTLE GUY” A CHANCE?

Costs budgeting remains highly controversial.  One question that is open to debate is – is it useful?  Its utility may be most apparent in cases where the sizes and resources of the litigants are vastly disparate. (Many personal injury lawyers would argue that this is virtually every personal injury case where the defendant is insured, […]

PROPORTIONALITY: WE WILL, WE WILL ROCK YOU

I am grateful to Jon Lord for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Rowley in Dr Brian May -v- Wavell Group Plc  given today (16/06/2016).  It is another case that centres on proportionality. There was a considerable reduction of the costs assessed on the “item by item” basis because the overall figure […]

OVERSPENDING ON YOUR COSTS BUDGET? BETTER TELL YOUR CLIENT

Way back in the mist of time (that is post-Mitchell, pre-Denton) I reported a decision of District Judge Lumb on sanctions and costs budgeting. That particular post was then  plagiarised without any reference to me (matters were resolved amicably). However  when I found myself lecturing alongside DJ Lumb at the PIBA conference earlier this year […]

“THAT PROPORTIONALITY JUDGMENT”: 10 KEY POINTS

The post yesterday on the decision of Master Gordon-Saker in BNM -v-MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B13 (Costs) set out the case in some detail.  Here are the key points of that decision. KEY POINTS On an assessment of costs on the standard basis proportionality should prevail over reasonableness. The court should first make an assessment […]

PROPORTIONALITY CONQUERS ALL? PROFIT COSTS (AND COUNSEL’S FEES) HALVED

The decision of Master Gordon-Saker in BNM -v-MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B13 (Costs) has already received widespread publicity. The principle of proportionality was used to halve profit costs and counsel’s fees and make a substantial reduction on the insurance premium. “…. I propose that in an assessment of costs on the standard basis, proportionality should […]