Search

NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION - I WILL REMEMBER TO REVISE MY BUDGET

“Well, just do the best that you can” is a recurring phrase heard by Costs Lawyers from their Solicitor clients when it is pointed out that they are significantly over budget when the Bill comes to be drawn. Absent some magical negotiation, even the best Costs Lawyer will often struggle to persuade the opponent (or ultimately the Court) that there is some good reason why more should be allowed in any particular phase than as provided for by the budget. It really is a case of “shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted”. The better approach, of course, is to have drawn the budget well in the first place (your friendly Costs Lawyer is here to help) or, if necessary, have sought to rev

HOW TO SET A COSTS BUDGET

The High Court has provided guidance to Judges as to how they should set Budgets. In Yirenki v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 3102 (QB) Jacobs J firmly shut the door on the practice of approving budgeted costs subject to further argument on hourly rates at detailed assessment. He also warned against the danger of micro-managing in the budget process. He was dealing with an appeal from the decision of Master Davison who had stated at the CCMC that he would deal with the budget in his usual way, which led to him expressing his approval of the budgets as summarised here: “Save that the parties reserve their positions as to incurred costs and as to hourly rates, the Master approved the budgets

Boxing Clever on assigning a CFA

We have another celebrity case illuminating the field of costs law, following in the footsteps of previous articles we have written about Brian May of Queen and Sir Cliff Richard. This time, the celebrity involved is Frank Warren, the famous boxing promoter and deals with the thorny question of assignment of CFA’s. In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC 3322(QB) the High Court was being asked to consider Mr Warren’s request for permission to appeal against the findings of Master Leonard in the Senior Courts Costs Office. Mr Warren had sought a solicitor/client assessment of fees claimed by his former Solicitors of over £900,000. Master Leonard had ruled against Mr Warren on 2 preliminary

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