Latest news
Services
People
News and Events
Other
Blogs

Latest News

Late acceptance of a Part 36 offer

  • Posted
  • Author

IEH v Powell [2023] EWHC 1037 and the late acceptance of a Part 36 offer when the Claimant is a child suffering with brain damage.

Verification of fee earner experience

  • Posted

In the matter of Brierley v Outo & Ors, Costs Judge Nagalingam gave consideration to the paying parties’ application that the receiving party’s Bill of Costs should be redrawn as one of the fee earners named did not have the necessary years of experience.

Hughes Fowler Carruthers Ltd v Gubbay

  • Posted

The differences between a summary assessment on the standard basis and a solicitor/client assessment on the indemnity basis

Litigation Funding in Divorce Proceedings

Claire Kretzmann
  • Posted
  • Author

The matter of Simon v Simon & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1048 concerns a Court of Appeal decision regarding the function of a litigation loan provider in divorce proceedings.

Further QOCS guidance for "Mixed Claims"

Claire Kretzmann
  • Posted
  • Author

The matter of Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 1974 (KB) concerned a claim for assault, battery and misfeasance in public office. The Defendant’s officers had tasered the Claimant, causing him to fall to the ground and hit his head.

Fixed recoverable costs

  • Posted
  • Author

With the FRC changes, a further track has been created, known as the intermediate track. Claims valued between £25,000 - £100,000 will now usually be allocated to the Intermediate Track, provided that their complexity makes them unsuitable for the Fast Track. In the event the claim is particularly complex, the Court are able to allocate the claim to the Multi-Track, which means the FRC regime will not apply.

Interim vs Final bill - again

Lucy Hodgkins
  • Posted
  • Author

In Ivanishvili v Signature Litigation LLP [2023] EWHC 2189 (SCCO) Costs, Master Leonard found that the bills raised to the client were interim, not statutory bills and so all could be open to assessment.

Diag Human Se and another v Volterra Fietta

Megan Roxburgh
  • Posted
  • Author

This is a court of appeal decision, dismissing the appeal of a firm of solicitors who had been instructed under an unenforceable CFA.

The appellants were a firm of Solicitors, Volterra Fietta, who the respondents engaged to advise in relation to an investment treaty arbitration claim.

Jugmohan Boodia & Anor v Richard John Slade

  • Posted

There is no requirement to have informed consent in the Solicitors Act or in the Solicitors Conduct Rules as a pre-condition of an interim bill.

However, permission was granted to appeal in respect of the issue of whether the Costs Judge was right to bar the consumer protection grounds on the res judicata grounds (issue estoppel, waiver and abuse of process).

  • Page 2 of 5