header-logo header-logo

Claiming for failure

08 January 2016
Issue: 7681 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

How can a judgment creditor extract payment by the judgment debtor of enforcement fees and interest (especially those of an enforcement agent) which arise out of an unsuccessful attempt at execution? Can they, for example, be added to the judgment debt on a subsequent charging order application?

The court is empowered by CPR 44.2 to award costs to the judgment creditor which have been reasonably incurred and are reasonable and proportionate in amount even though they relate to an enforcement attempt which has been unsuccessful. It is surprising, for example, that when a judgment creditor abandons an application for a third party debt order because the third party is not holding any money due to the judgment debtor that the judgment creditor very rarely asks for their abortive fixed costs to be added to the judgment debt. What, however, the judgment creditor is not entitled to do is to unilaterally add abortive enforcement costs—and those incurred through unsuccessful execution can now be quite substantial—to the judgment debt when they come to make their next attempt

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll