header-logo header-logo

15 July 2016
Issue: 7707 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs

Surrey (a child and protected party by his litigation friend Surrey) v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust; AH (a protected party by her litigation friend XXX) v Lewisham Healthcare NHS Trust; Yesil (a child and protected party by his litigation friend Yesil) v Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWHC 1598 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 33 (Jul)

The Queen’s Bench Division allowed an appeal by the successful claimants against a costs decision whereby the costs judge held that the changed funding arrangements were not reasonable on the basis that the litigation friends had agreed to the hanged funding arrangements without having been told that the consequence would be the “loss” of a 10% uplift. The court held that where the issue had come into the arena in a costs assessment exercise if it ever did, in all but the most exceptional cases a court could decide if the failure to mention the 10% uplift would have made any difference by applying the test of the reasonable person standing in the shoes of the individual

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: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

back-to-top-scroll