header-logo header-logo

17 February 2017
Issue: 7734 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

“I want more”

I contend that a claimant on a specified claim can ask the court for more than the fixed costs on the claim form. What procedure should be adopted to facilitate this where the claimant is in a position to enter a default judgment?

CPR 45.1 makes it clear that fixed costs are what are awarded “unless the court orders otherwise”. So there is a discretion, but the court might take some persuading “otherwise”. A departure from fixed costs could be justified where there is a contractual entitlement to a costs indemnity or reasonable costs or by the complexity and volume of work generated by the case. The claim form should state that assessed costs are sought where a figure for fixed costs is solicited and a Pt 23 application notice issued with the request for judgment. Team members have made or encountered orders being made in these circumstances for up to £20,000.

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

Clarke Willmott—Kevin Joynes & Neil Gosling

Clarke Willmott—Kevin Joynes & Neil Gosling

Clarke Willmott bolsters housebuilder expertise in Birmingham

Carpmaels & Ransford—Kevin Cordina

Carpmaels & Ransford—Kevin Cordina

Firm adds former Simmons Simmons patent head to engineering and tech team

ACTAPS—Sally Goodger

ACTAPS—Sally Goodger

Freeths strengthens its voice in national disputes with ACTAPS committee appointment

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll