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.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
