header-logo header-logo

21 June 2007 / Dr Mr Friston , Prof A Mcgee , P Hughes , M Smith
Issue: 7278 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

Costs Law Brief

WHO BEARS THE COSTS OF THE COSTS WAR?

In Myatt and others v National Coal Board [2007] EWCA Civ 307, [2007] ALL ER (D) 301 (Mar) the Court of Appeal dealt with the issue of who should pay the costs of an appeal concerning the enforceability of the claimants’ conditional fee agreements (CFAs). The claimants had lost that appeal (see Myatt and others v National Coal Board [2006] EWCA Civ 1017) and the issue was who should pay the defendants’ costs: should the costs be paid by the claimants themselves, or by their solicitors?

The claimants had no insurance in respect of the appeal because their after the event (ATE) insurance was itself conditional upon their conditional fee agreements being enforceable. Had this not been the case, the defendant would have been content with an order against the claimants themselves, but in view of the fact that the claimants were uninsured, the defendant had no option but

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

Clarke Willmott—Anita Rasaratnam

Clarke Willmott—Anita Rasaratnam

Clarke Willmott strengthens social housing development offering with senior London appointment

Trowers & Hamlins—David Meecham

Trowers & Hamlins—David Meecham

Trowers strengthens Birmingham real estate team with partner hire

Blake Morgan—Jennifer Ray & Louise Culleton

Blake Morgan—Jennifer Ray & Louise Culleton

Blake Morgan expands private client and regulatory teams with new legal directors

NEWS
A mood of cautious optimism has enveloped the criminal law sector following indications the Prime Minister may abandon planned jury reforms
Helping to source the services and providers you need
The Senior Courts Costs Office has clarified that judges conducting detailed assessment proceedings cannot order security for costs—a ruling that may leave successful parties exposed to further litigation expense
Rejecting a generous settlement can prove an expensive mistake, as two recent high-profile cases demonstrate
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) continues to show that failing to disclose regulatory issues can attract harsher consequences than the original misconduct itself
back-to-top-scroll