header-logo header-logo

02 January 2019
Issue: 7822 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Green light for revising budgets up

Bar for what constitutes a significant development should not be set too high

Claimants can revise budgets upwards if more disclosure than expected is needed, representing a ‘significant development’, a High Court master has held.

Ruling in Ohoud Al-Najar (a protected party) v the Cumberland Hotel [2018] EWHC 3532 (QB), Master Davison agreed a 78% budget increase of £49,185 to £111,811 after the expected 20 to 30 lever arch files of documents turned out to be 55 lever arch files. He outlined five broad principles, including that whether a development is ‘significant’ is a question of fact; if what occurred should reasonably have been anticipated it will probably not be ‘significant’ or a ‘development’; and the development can occur in the normal course of litigation.

‘As a matter of policy, it seems to me that the bar for what constitutes a significant development should not be set too high because, otherwise, parties preparing a budget would always err on the side of caution by making overgenerous (to them) assessments of what was to be anticipated,’ he said.

The case concerned a shocking incident where a violent criminal gained access to the rooms where nine members of an extended family were sleeping and attacked three sisters with a claw hammer, causing serious facial and head injuries. Liability was complex.

City University’s Professor Dominic Regan (pictured), NLJ columnist, said: ‘This is a rare and overdue steer as to when a budget can properly be varied.

‘We are more than five years on from implementation and yet practitioners stumble around as if blindfolded.’

Francis Kendall, vicechairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL), said: ‘The ACL’s surveys over the five years since costs budgeting came into force have consistently shown that solicitors are not making enough applications to revise their budgets, when we all know in practice how often they are blown off course by events that were not reasonably foreseeable at the time they were set. Failing to revise a budget in such circumstances is just storing up problems for the later assessment of costs.

‘We urge solicitors to learn from this case and keep in mind the need to update their budgets when the situation demands it.’

Issue: 7822 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll