header-logo header-logo

04 April 2025
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Costs , Litigants in person
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: No escape from costs compliance for litigants in person

214564
A recent case illustrates the financial risks facing litigants in person (LiPs) who fail to comply with the correct procedure on costs. Julian Caddick, council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers and a partner and head of costs at Thompsons Solicitors, explains the case in this week’s NLJ, and offers key takeaways for practitioners who find themselves opposite a LiP.

In this case, the LiP succeeded in some regards in the case but lost out financially due to compliance failures on costs.

Caddick writes: ‘The costs judge expressed sympathy for the LiP having to deal with intricate costs rules, but a bill was still required, something the claimant appeared to be aware of.’ 
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Costs , Litigants in person
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll