The coronavirus crisis “should not be part of the debate” on the introduction of fixed costs for clinical negligence cases, the new president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers has said.
The question of whether underspending on a phase is a good reason to depart from a budget has come under the spotlight again after a costs judge ruled that it was not.
The starting point in the Competition Appeal Tribunal is that no order for costs should be made against an unsuccessful regulator acting purely in its regulatory capacity, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
The Supreme Court has called on the Civil Procedure Rules Committee to review the issue of whether disbursements should be payable separately in fixed-cost personal injury cases.
A defendant whose conduct of its case has been “outstandingly bad” has seen its budget limited to court fees after being late in submitting one for £110,000.
The High Court has cut a costs award to a seriously injured claimant because exaggeration was “built into the structure” of the way the claim was presented before and during the trial.
Guidance on the conduct of remote detailed assessments has been produced to get the system moving during the lockdown. They are not included in the civil court listing priorities.
A solicitor who miscertified a bill of costs has been fined £20,000 by a disciplinary tribunal, avoiding a harsher penalty because of her reliance on the costs firm advising her.
The Civil Justice Council has been tasked with reviewing the guideline hourly rates, it has emerged, with costs specialists urging it to revert to the old system of setting them locally.
The courts are getting harder on parties who fail to follow directions to try alternative dispute resolution, with judges imposing indemnity costs in two cases in recent weeks.
We look at two cases where the courts have had to strike the right balance between supporting arbitrations whilst also recognising their independence and jurisdictional limitations.