News and Knowledge

Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 178 – Solicitor/Client costs guidance

The court of appeal has upheld a decision made by a Senior Costs Judge that Points of Dispute are to be more specific in order to help the parties and the court ‘determine precisely what is in dispute and why’.   The decision was made in the matter of Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020]…

Beardmore v Lancashire County Council (unreported, 2019)

Agency Fees for medical records are still recoverable – Beardmore v Lancashire County Council (unreported, 2019). The matter refers to an ELP/PL tripping claim which settled for £3,500.00. Medical records were obtained by a medical agency that claimed an uplifted profit element in addition to the direct costs of the medical records from the provider.…

QOC’s Protection Is Still Available For Second Tier Appeals

In the case of Wickes v Blair (No2) Costs [2020] EWCA Civ 17, the Claimant had already undertaken an unsuccessful appeal and had further appealed to the Court of Appeal. It was agreed that the Claimant should pay the Defendants costs of the appeal but it was not agreed that the Claimant should have QOCS…

New Test of Proportionality and ATE Premiums in Clinical Negligence – Court of Appeal Guidance

The case of West & Demouilpied v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220 relates to two Clinical Negligence claims whereby the court set down how to determine proportionality in post-Laspo cases and the recoverable element of the ATE premium in Clinical Negligence claims. In the first case, (West) damages were recovered at £10,000.…

Story Update – JLE v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

(Story Update) Part 36 offers -How close is too close? JLE v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust EWHC B18 appealed. Following on from my previous article on the matter of JLE v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC B18 (Costs), an appeal of the decision has now been heard before Mr.…

Part 36 offers – How close is too close?

The question was posed as to whether the consequences of failing to beat a Part 36 offer under CPR 36.17(4) were severable.