By Jack Holland Following on from our earlier article we have now obtained sight of the newly drafted Precedent T which is to be implemented on 1 October 2020. MRN’s initial observations are that the Precedent T has sought to simplify the process adopting a dual approach combining the Precedent H and R. Starting with…
By Lindsay Woolford News in: Guidance on the new Precedent T is now here! As mooted in February 2020, it has now been announced on 21st July 2020 that Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2020 contain Rules changes in respect to the CPR and also the 122nd Practice Direction Update that will significantly update…
Kathryn Regan Following the decision in Ainsworth –v- Stewarts Law LLP, there has, perhaps unsurprisingly, been a shift in the way points of dispute are prepared, particularly in respect of Solicitors Act Assessments. The recent matter of Edinburgh –v- Fieldfisher LLP [2020] EWHC 862 (QB) highlights that parties should be cautious when preparing limited points…
Louise Satterthwaite Farmer v The Chief Constable of Lancashire [2019] EWHC B18 (Costs) This matter related to a claim for costs by way of a detailed assessment hearing before the Court for a successful Claimant’s Bill of Costs. The Defendant had applied for costs to be disallowed in full on the basis of the Claimant’s…
Melissa Parnham Indemnity v Standard costs – The importance of ADR and the type of offers made In Jagger v Holland [2020] EWHC 1197 (QB) a successful Defendant was not permitted to recover costs on the indemnity basis partially due to a failure to engage in ADR, despite making a time limited offer during the…
Lindsay Woolford In the recent High Court decision in Hutson and Others v Tata Steel UK Ltd [2020] Costs LR 369, consideration was given to the factors to apply in an Application to revise a Party’s Budget under PD 3E, where Significant Developments warrant such revisions. The Relevant Rules In respect of the revision to…
David Burke In the recent case of Heathfield International LLC v Axiom Stone” (London) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1075 (Ch) the 2nd Defendant filed their Costs Budget out of time. They issued an application for relief from sanction and may well have expected to obtain the same in light of the approach to be taken following “Denton”…
Jack Holland In the recent case of Utting v City College Norwich [2020] EQHC B20 (Costs) Master Brown has rejected the Defendant’s submissions that an underspend should amount to a good reason to go behind the budgeted sums to allow a line by line assessment of costs incurred. Master Brown examined the contrasting authorities on…
Jack Andrew Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (‘QOCS’). A topic revered by any cost practitioner and one that does not seem to be going away any time soon. The above case previously proved very helpful assistance with respect to answering the question whether it was possible to contract out of fixed costs, and indeed, reference…
Avi Dolties A question of reason says XDE v North Middlesex University Hospital Trust [2020] EWCA Civ 543 Court of Appeal upholds High Court decision in XDE v North Middlesex University Hospital Trust [2020] EWCA Civ 543. Back in July 2019, we reviewed the case of XDE v North Middlesex University Hospital Trust [2019] EWHC…