header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
12 July 2024 / Clare Hughes-Williams , Catrin Davies
Issue: 8079 / Categories: Features , Profession , Costs
printer mail-detail

Wasted costs applications: on the up!

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
181420
Clare Hughes-Williams & Catrin Davies advise lawyers to guard against the rise in wasted costs applications
  • Wasted cost applications are not easy and should only be made in relatively extreme cases where the issues can be disposed of summarily.

As lawyers who represent the profession and their insurers, we have seen an increase in winning parties in litigation using the wasted costs jurisdiction to recover the significant legal costs that are often incurred. Rather than the losing party, it is lawyers who are their target. Recent cases support our experience (Al Tarboush v Yusuf Cassam [2024] EWHC 639 (KB), [2024] All ER (D) 121 (Mar) and Rainer Hughes Solicitors v Liverpool Victoria, Emine Karadag and Dzheylyan Velkova Ilieva [2024] EWHC 585 (KB)), [2024] All ER (D) 87 (Mar)). But should it be the lawyers who pay?

The court’s power to award wasted costs is contained in s 51(6) of the Supreme Court Act 1981, and s 51(7) states: ‘“Wasted costs” means any costs incurred by a party:

(a)

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
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll