header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
12 October 2012
Issue: 7533 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs—Payment of costs by non-party—Solicitor

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Tinseltime Ltd v Roberts and others [2012] EWHC 2628 (TCC), [2012] All ER (D) 19 (Oct)

Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court (Manchester District Registry), Judge Stephen Davies sitting as a Judge of the High Court, 28 Sep 2012

The High Court has considered principles under which a solicitor may be liable as a non-party funder of proceedings under s 51(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) and/or CPR 48.

Richard Coplin (instructed by GHP Legal) for the defendants. Simon Wilton (instructed by Berrymans Lace Mawer LLP) for the solicitor.

The claimant company commenced proceedings against the defendants for negligence and nuisance (the substantive proceedings). It instructed the respondent solicitor under a conditional fee agreement (CFA). The solicitor advised the claimant’s sole director and shareholder (the director) about after the event insurance (ATE) but the director was not interested due to the company’s difficult financial position. Following a preliminary issue ([2011] All ER (D) 76 (Jun)) the court ordered the claims against the first and

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll