header-logo header-logo

27 January 2011
Issue: 7450 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line
printer mail-detail

Not so fast

If a fast track trial is adjourned on the day before evidence is adduced...

If a fast track trial is adjourned on the day before evidence is adduced and an order for the costs thrown away is made, is the receiving party entitled to the fixed trial fee for counsel? Also, if the claim later settles more than 28 days before the adjourned trial date, is the claimant entitled to the return of the hearing fee?

Assuming counsel is present with their brief, we consider that their client should have the fixed trial costs as or as part of the wasted costs which the paying party is condemned to bear. CPR 46.2 should not be interpreted as meaning that the trial must have taken place for the trial costs to be allowed. We do not consider that the hearing fee is returnable. The trial has been listed and court time lost. An adjournment would not trigger liability for a second hearing (or listing) fee: conversely, a settlement after an abortive hearing for which the court was not blame

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

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
Could an online LLM in Commercial and Technology Law expand your career options?
The controversial Courts and Tribunals Bill has passed its second reading by 304 votes to 203, despite concerted opposition from the legal profession
The presumption of parental involvement is to be abolished, the Lord Chancellor David Lammy has confirmed
A highly experienced chartered legal executive has been prevented from representing her client in financial remedies proceedings, in a case that highlights the continued fallout from Mazur
Plans to commandeer 50%-75% of the interest on lawyers’ client accounts to fund the justice system overlook the cost and administrative burden of this on small and medium law firms, CILEX has warned
back-to-top-scroll