header-logo header-logo

20 April 2007 / Prof A Mcgee , P Hughes , Dr Friston , M Smith
Issue: 7269 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Costs law brief

Ordinary claims, Defamation claims, Group litigation, Public interest challenges

Costs capping

In Willis v Nicolson [2007] EWCA Civ 199, the Court of Appeal (assisted by the senior costs judge as assessor) dealt with an appeal in respect of an application for a costs cap in a personal injury claim.  The claimant was a motorcyclist who had suffered extremely serious injuries in a road traffic accident.  On a full liability basis, the value of the claim is likely to be at least £5 million; the total costs for the whole action were estimated by the claimant’s solicitors at £959,342.

Field J refused the defendant’s application for a costs cap, but in order to provide her with a measure of protection, he ordered that the claimant be held to his latest estimate.

The Court of Appeal (Buxton, Smith and Wilson LLJs) dismissed the appeal for the primary reasons that it was now too late to impose a costs cap and also because of the further costs that would be

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll