header-logo header-logo

Costs: getting personal

04 April 2025 / Julian Caddick
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Features , Profession , Costs , Litigants in person
printer mail-detail
214564
The complexities of costs proceedings can be a minefield for litigants in person. But the courts expect compliance with the rules, writes Julian Caddick
  • Considers the case of Mlundira v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 189 (KB), in which the LiP claimant had succeeded in judicial review proceedings regarding unlawful immigration detention.

For 50 years, the Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975 (as amended) has provided a mechanism for litigants in person (LiPs) to recover costs from other parties to proceedings. However, many LiPs fail to appreciate the complexities and intricacies of rules of court and common law, particularly when it comes to costs proceedings.

Under r 46.5 of the CPR, a LiP’s recoverable fees are limited to two-thirds of what they would have recovered if legally represented. This does not apply to disbursements, only recoverable fees. They are further restricted to an hourly rate of £19 per hour unless they can demonstrate evidence of financial loss in connection with time they have reasonably

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

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll