header-logo header-logo

COSTS—WASTED COSTS—WAIVER

28 March 2008
Issue: 7314 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

D v H [2008] EWHC 559 (Fam), [2008] All ER (D) 286 (Mar)

Family Division

Sumner J

19 March 2008

Where a litigant has obtained costs orders against the other party and also a wasted costs order against the other party’s solicitors in respect of the same costs, the wasted costs order cannot survive when the litigant has waived his costs orders against the other party.

Edward Cross for the solicitors.

Anthony Kefford for the husband.

Costs orders were made against the wife in the course of ancillary relief proceedings and connected proceedings in which the husband’s brother intervened to assert an interest in the former matrimonial home.

In January 2007, the husband applied for a wasted costs order against the wife’s solicitors (the firm) in respect of both sets of proceedings. The following day, the wife applied for an adjournment of the final ancillary relief hearing. The application was dismissed, the district judge ordering the firm to show cause why it should not pay the husband’s costs thereof. The husband and wife subsequently reached an agreement

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll