header-logo header-logo

High Court departs from conventional ‘costs in the case’ order

08 November 2024 / Sophie Houghton
Issue: 8093 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
Sophie Houghton on why it doesn’t pay to put forward overly ambitious figures in costs budgets
  • Parties should not presume that following a costs management hearing a ‘costs in the case’ order will be made.

Recently there have been two decisions by Master Thornett sitting in the King’s Bench Division of the High Court in respect of the appropriate costs order to make following a costs management hearing. In both cases, the master made clear that it should not be presumed by the parties that an order for ‘costs in the case’ will be made following this type of hearing. Although an order for ‘costs in the case’ is frequently made at the end of a costs management hearing, parties may be in the habit of thinking that this will always happen, which is not the case.

Disproportionality

The first of these decisions is Worcester v Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB), which involved a clinical negligence claim concerning the defendant’s treatment of the claimant’s mental health. Following

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll