header-logo header-logo

Cost benefit analysis

20 October 2016 / Kerry Underwood
Issue: 7721 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Budgeting
printer mail-detail

Costs orders: who pays & when, asks Kerry Underwood

    • Wasted costs orders in civil litigation—a rapidly developing area of law.

    Wasted costs orders can only be made against a representative, whereas non-party costs orders can be made against anyone, including a representative.

    In both cases the power derives from s 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981. Sub-section (3) provides that “the court shall have full power to determine by whom and to what extent the costs are to be paid” and this covers the county court, High Court and the civil division of the Court of Appeal (s 51(1)).

    This piece deals with wasted costs orders in civil litigation (but there are similar sanctions in the criminal courts and in tribunals) and non-party costs orders.

    Wasted costs

    Wasted costs includes disallowing costs and ordering payment of costs (s 51(6)) and can be at the suit of the representative’s own client or the other side

    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