header-logo header-logo

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

Cost benefit analysis

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

    NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

    NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

    Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

    Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

    Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

    Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

    DWF—Chris Air

    DWF—Chris Air

    Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

    NEWS
    The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
    The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
    A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

    An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

    Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
    back-to-top-scroll