Costs Round Up #3
Welcome to a costs round-up of the best costs-related posts published this week.
The Court of Appeal has upheld a High Court ruling last year that a client’s loss of mental capacity in the course of proceedings does not automatically terminate their solicitor’s retainer. “Was anybody surprised by the court’s decision in this case?” writes Legal Orange on the very easy decision in Blankley v Manchester NHS Trust
The High Court has this week dismissed a challenge to the legal aid changes brought by Rights of Women. The judgment is here with a useful background piece on the government restrictions on legal aid for domestic violence victims provided by the Guardian newspaper. Challenge to Domestic Violence Evidence Requirements fails provides additional commentary from John M Hayes’ Michelle Barlow
There are developments on the LAA Client and Costs Management System with contract notices now issued to all providers for mandatory use. John M Hayes news updates here include full links to all training resources.
Kerry Underwood presents Coventry costs calamity warning : a phony war or a £15bn headache for the government? The piece counts down to the Coventry v Lawrence finale listed for 9, 10 and 12 February 2015.
Gordon Exall provides commentary on the relevant criteria for appealing a costs budget considered and applied in Havenga –v- Gateshead Foundation Trust and demonstrates how difficult it is for a party to appeal a costs budget.
Gordon Exall also presents commentary on Simpson v MGN Limited in which Mr Justice Warby considered several contentions in relation to costs budgeting; non-service of costs schedules and proportionality and highlights again a case that serves as an object lesson as to the difficulties that can arise. His post is entitled preliminary applications departing from costs budgets and failure to serve cost schedules a high court decision
Neil Rose writing at Litigation Futures provides a brief report on comments from Lord Neuberger highlighting “the President of the Supreme Court, has said it is “more than disappointing” that over four years after government backing for the Jackson reforms “we still do not have fixed costs for all fast-track cases”. He said he hoped fixed costs could be extended further to “smaller multi-track cases”, such building disputes which could not be settled quickly out of court.””
If you have a blog on costs related matters and would like to submit your post to the round-up, e-mail: Ilkley@johnmhayes.co.uk
Back to summary