header-logo header-logo

26 April 2013
Issue: 7557 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs

Murray and another v Neil Dowlman Architecture Ltd [2013] EWHC 872 (TCC), [2013] All ER (D) 92 (Apr)

It was settled law that the court had the power to depart from an approved or agreed costs budget if it was satisfied that there was good reason to do so. It might, for that purpose, take into consideration all the circumstances of the case and had to place particular emphasis on the function of the budget as imposing a limit on recoverable costs. The primary function of the budget was to ensure that the costs incurred were not only reasonable but proportionate to what was at stake in the proceedings.

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

DAC Beachcroft—Clare Dewar

DAC Beachcroft—Clare Dewar

DAC Beachcroft strengthens Scottish real estate capabilitywith partner appointment

Womble Bond Dickinson—Brendan Ryan

Womble Bond Dickinson—Brendan Ryan

Womble Bond Dickinson appoints Brendan Ryan as partner in Public Law Projects team

Parklane Plowden Chambers—five appointments

Parklane Plowden Chambers—five appointments

Parklane Plowden Chambers welcomes five new barristers

NEWS
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
Police powers targeting concealed identities at protests come with procedural conditions that could determine whether prosecutions succeed
back-to-top-scroll