Nicolaou v Cass (2017) Claim Number B04LV651 in the Liverpool County Court This was a Clinical Negligence claim which settled for £250,000.00, costs were then to be dealt with. As part of the costs, the Claimant sought to recover an ATE Premium of £53,145.00 plus IPT, ARAG were the insurers in this instance. The matter…
Mrs. Francois v Barclays Bank plc [2017] EWCH 3531 (QB) in the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court the Judge allowed an appeal against a costs order, which had been made by a Circuit Judge. The appellant, Mrs Francois, (F) issued a small claim against the respondent Bank (B) for race discrimination. The claim…
Lords Ltd v HSBC Bank Plc [2018] EWHC 860 (Comm) The main action arose from an investment made by the Claimant in 2007 in two financial products (bonds or policies) issued by the Defendant with minimum terms of 5 years. The sums involved were not insubstantial. The Claimant alleged that the bonds or policies were…
Sir Kevin Barron MP & Others v Jane Collins MEP & UKIP [2018] EWHC 253 (QB) This is a judgment by Mr Justice Warby in relation to a third-party costs order against the Second Defendant, UKIP. UKIP agreed to be joined to the action for the purposes of resolving whether it should pay costs incurred…
The implications of using these two different negotiation tactics were deemed “both real and important” in Marcura Equities FZE & Anor v Nisomar Ventures & Anor [2018] EWHC 523 (QB). Communications “Without Prejudice” allow disputing parties to negotiate freely and protect themselves from repercussions of future prejudice but most importantly they are not admissible in…
Costs issues can arise at any point, before, during or after litigation. When a small, discrete point crops up it’s the temptation of many litigators to try and deal with the issue themselves. After all how hard can it be? This approach can lead to some peril, as was highlighted in the recent case of…
Master Rowley, leading costs judge, has provided authority in the case of Jallow v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC B7 (Costs) regarding the ever popular issue of whether a reduction of the hourly rates in the bill of costs to the parts which represents the ‘incurred’ costs section of a costs budget, is a good enough…
The initial decision An action was brought by an estate claiming ownership of a property. The defendant sought to argue that she owned the property outright. The judge at first instance held that it was held as joint tenants, 50% each. In the first instance the Judge awarded costs to the Defendant, ordering that the…
The Court addressed a number of issues in this relating to the validity of Part 36 offers, costs consequences applying to Part 36 offers and sanctions for failing to file or serve a budget. On the 22 February 2018, Arnold J gave judgment in the favour of the Claimants on their claim against the Defendant…
In Nash v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC B4 (Costs), the Defendant advanced the argument that where the Court has reduced the hourly rates in relation to the incurred costs, that is a good reason to apply the same reduced rates to the ‘budgeted’, i.e. future costs. The proposed method to achieve the same, presented…