Search

Court of Protection costs: the OPG 105 form and it’s impact one year on.

SPH explain the OPG 105 form and it’s impact one year on. Effects of New Measures Introduced Last Year Professional Deputies Annual Bills of Costs for General Management work must now include the OPG 105 form. It is anticipated that these Bills of Costs will come under careful scrutiny when assessed for the first time against the predictions and estimates provided a year previously. In short, any departure from the predicted or estimated costs made a year ago, by more than 20%, without good reason, will be disallowed. Form OPG 105 This form was introduced last year, and will act very much like a budget in Civil Litigation matters, or a case plan, in Publically Funded matters. It’s purpose is

Costs budgeting latest – further “tension” – Woodburn v Thomas [2017] EWHC B16 (Costs)

Costs budgeting latest – further “tension” The world of costs rarely stands still, not least most recently in the areas of interplay between budgets and detailed assessment, with the writer addressing the same only a matter of days ago within this blog, with Deputy Master Campbell providing guidance in the matter of RNB v London Borough of Newsham, SCCO ref CCD 1702513, judgment 4 August 2017, as to how the approach in Harrison ought to be adopted. Hot on the heels of this further guidance, Master McCloud, sitting as a Deputy Costs Judge in the matter of Woodburn v Thomas [2017] EWHC B16 (Costs), identified what she has referred to as a “tension” between Practice Direction 3E B(6)(d) (requi

Updating Costs Budgets – amending incurred costs – what is the correct approach?

Updating Costs Budgets – amending incurred costs – what is the correct approach? There has, since the inception of Costs Budgeting, been much, both written in the legal press and by way of case law, endeavouring to clarify the aims and intentions for Jackson LJ’s vision, and also to seek to smooth the process as a whole. Most recent of these decisions have come in the form of the judgment in the matter of Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 792 in respect of which we wrote in this blog and further provided additional insight only a few days ago, following the judgment of Deputy Master Campbell in the matter of RNB v London Borough of Newham, S

Harrison interpreted – hourly rates a good reason to depart from the budgeted costs at Detailed Asse

Harrison interpreted – hourly rates a good reason to depart from the budgeted costs at Detailed Assessment So you thought that following the decision in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Hospital NHS Trust ((2017) 3 Costs LR 424, you would generally recover the budgeted costs amount allowed for each phase upon assessment? Think again. So seems to be the impact of the decision of Deputy Master Campbell in RNB v London Borough of Newham, SCCO ref CCD 1702513, judgment 4 August 2017. In a case which had been costs managed, upon detailed assessment the paying party challenged the hourly rates sought in Part 1 (the” incurred costs” at the time of the Budget preparation) an

Costs Blog

Disclaimer: The content of this blog is provided on a complimentary basis. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of SPH Costing Services Ltd. The content of the blog is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice on any specific matter or generally. Individual Legal advice should be sought from a Lawyer in relation to any specific case or issue. SPH Costing Services Ltd does not accept any responsibility for the correctness of this blog or for any consequences of relying on it.

© 2020 SPH Costing Services Ltd - Registered in England 3194408

Costs Lawyers and Law Costs Draftsmen