header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
29 November 2024 / Sarah Jane Cartlidge
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Features , Costs , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Non-party costs orders: are the tides turning?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll