Parties need to consider the costs & be prepared to justify them as reasonable & proportionate, says Paul Bracewell
- The decision in Barts Health NHS Trust v Salmon clearly puts ‘good reason’ at the forefront of the receiving party’s mind when preparing a phased bill/Precedent S where a matter settles early and phases are not completed.
Since budgets were introduced in 2013, parties have had to consider what constitutes ‘good reason’ to depart from a budget under CPR 3.18. It is often thought that if, in a case where a costs management order has been made, a party has incurred estimated costs less than the budgeted estimated figure, those costs will be allowed.
In January 2019, His Honour Judge Dight, with Master Brown sitting as assessor, ruled in Barts Health NHS Trust v Salmon [2019] Lexis Citation 27, an appeal by the defendant paying party against decisions made by Master Whalan sitting as a judge of Central London County Court.
The case was a clinical negligence claim which settled when
