header-logo header-logo

29 November 2024 / Sarah Jane Cartlidge
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Features , Costs , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Non-party costs orders: are the tides turning?

199163
Successful non-party costs orders against credit hire operators are swelling in number: Sarah Jane Cartlidge considers whether these are just a drop in the ocean
  • 2023-24 has seen a number of persuasive or binding cases where the courts considered it just to make a non-party costs order against a credit hire operator.
  • The hire companies involved in the cases were considered to be the real beneficiaries of the credit hire claim and were intrinsically linked to the litigation.
  • There was no requirement to prove a link between the hire company’s involvement in the litigation and the costs incurred.

In 2023-24, there has been a number of high-profile cases where defendants have been successful in obtaining non-party costs orders (NPCOs) against credit hire operators (CHOs) in cases where credit hire is claimed, and the defendants had obtained a costs order which the claimant themselves had not been able to discharge.

Is this a turn in the tide? Are these cases gamechangers in sending a message

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll