|
Knight v Beyond Properties Pty Ltd & Ors, High Ct (Ch D) 26/5/2006
The principles relating to costs capping orders laid down in King v Telegraph Group Ltd (2004) EWCA Civ 613 , (2005) 1 WLR 2282, a defamation case, were not applicable to all litigation. In the instant case the fact that the claimant was instructing solicitors under a conditional fee agreement without after the event insurance cover was not enough in itself to justify a costs capping order being made.
Marsh v Sofaer & Anr, High Ct (Ch D) 25/5/2006
It was not appropriate to make a wasted costs order against solicitors who had acted for the claimant in an action that had been discontinued. The defendant had not made out an allegation that no reasonably competent solicitor could have concluded that the claimant had any realistic prospect of establishing that she had been under a disability for limitation purposes during the relevant period.
Woollard & Anr v Fowler, CC (Weston Super Mare)(Senior Costs Judge Hurst) 24/5/2006
Fees charged by medical reporting agencies for supplying medical reports and records were recoverable as disbursements under the CPR r.45.10(2) provided that they were reasonable and proportionate.
Cox & Anr v Fraser & Ors, High CT, 26/5/2006
The decision of the costs judge below was entirely correct and he had reached the correct conclusions on proportionality, the amount of the success fee under the conditional fee agreement and the appropriate hourly rate for the claimants' solicitor.
Brennan v Associated Asphalt Ltd, Sup Ct Costs Office (Senior Costs Judge Hurst) 18/5/2006
The Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 reg.3 required a Conditional Fee Agreement to specify how much of the percentage increase in a success fee related to the cost of the postponement of payment of solicitors' charges and disbursements. The words "if any" in reg.3(1)(b) of the Regulations did not mean that if the deferral element was nil there was no need to mention it.
Oyston v Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, Sup Ct Costs Office (Senior Costs Judge Hurst) 16/5/2006
A conditional fee agreement that provided for a 100 per cent success fee and payment of a bonus in the event that the client recovered damages in excess of a certain amount was in clear breach of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 s.58(4). A subsequent deed of variation was ineffective to rectify the situation and severance would not accord with either the statutory framework laid down for CFAs or with the correct approach to public policy.
|
