header-logo header-logo

Date set for Coventry costs challenge

02 October 2014
Issue: 7624 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

The potentially seismic Coventry v Lawrence costs challenge has been re-listed in the Supreme Court for 9-11 February next year.

The case, a nuisance claim valued at £74,000, racked up costs of more than £1m. However, the subsequent costs challenge on the basis that the recovery regime breaches a paying party’s Art 6 right to a fair trial could have a dramatic impact on the costs landscape.

The Supreme Court initially indicated that it might be appropriate to issue a declaration of incompatibility and that if the respondents wished to continue the costs challenge the case could be re-listed.

Opinion is divided as to the impact: it could make little difference as the recovery regime is no longer in place or it could mean £bns of additional liabilities imposed as part of a costs order can be recovered from the government.

Professor Dominic Regan told NLJ: “The view of every costs silk I have spoken to is that this point will go nowhere. We shall see.”

Issue: 7624 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll