© Getty images
A recent decision has provided long-awaited clarity on how medical reporting organisations can fairly recover costs, writes Kris Kilsby
- In JXX v Archibald, Senior Costs Judge Rowley concluded there was no requirement for medical reporting agencies to provide a breakdown equivalent to that produced by solicitors in their bill of costs.
- The senior costs judge held MRO fees were to be treated as a disbursement rather than outsourced solicitors’ work, in a decision he conceded would likely be appealed.
It has been almost two decades since the height of what is colloquially known as the ‘costs wars’: a period dominated by significant satellite litigation surrounding the enforceability of conditional fee agreements and the recoverability of success fees. Such disputes were commonplace, with a significant number of detailed assessment hearings occurring for relatively small-scale costs bills.
Over time, many costs reforms have taken place in an attempt to reduce the areas of dispute and in attempts to provide clarity and certainty. This has included both the implementation
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
