header-logo header-logo

Budgeting for the future

28 February 2019 / Patrick Allen , Riffat Yaqub
Issue: 7830 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Unforeseen costs can be unavoidable, but amending a budget upwards is no easy task, as Patrick Allen & Riffat Yaqub explain

 
  • In the case of Al-Najar v Cumberland Hotel (London) Ltd , there was dispute about whether a large unanticipated disclosure amounted to a ‘significant development’.
  • The master sent a strong message that not to allow an increase in such a case could lead to budgeteers making wildly overcautious budgets.

Cost budgets have been controversial from the outset, as they involve a significant element of crystal ball gazing. Predicting the future is not an exact science. By contrast, analysing the past is usually instructive. Trying to predict the course of litigation is particularly fraught as it depends on many factors outside the control of the budgeting party, eg conduct by the other party, experts, and decisions of the court.

Tactical tools

The theory behind budgets is that they control costs, but this is incorrect. They control the costs which can be recovered from an opponent. This is not

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll