header-logo header-logo

08 February 2013 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7547 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Not the end of the story?

Henry v NGN demonstrates a firmer line needs to be taken on costs budgeting, says Dominic Regan

The budgeting of multi-track litigation is the most important of costs reforms that lawyers should prepare for. We know this for Sir Rupert said so in an interview here last year (“Jackson on Jackson”).

The news that the Court of Appeal was going to hear the first ever case on budgeting, Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 19, and so be able to give practitioners guidance, excited many of us. However, the decision, handed down on 28 January, is a rum one as we shall see.

Background to Henry

Henry arose out of the defamation pilot scheme. The budgets of both sides were approved by the court at the outset. The essence of the budgeting process is that each party sets out in precedent H details of the work it proposes to do and the cost of performing it. Forms are exchanged and given to the court.

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
back-to-top-scroll