The Government has been persuaded not to extend the scope of the fixed cost tables beyond claims valued at £25,000 in clinical negligence. The NHS settle around 60% of total claims between £1,000 and £25,000, but these are the claims where the biggest disproportionality of costs to damages are demonstrated, with claimants recovering costs…
Read more…Master Brown followed Master Rowley when he found that the new test of proportionality did not apply to additional liabilities. In Murrells v Cambridge University NHS Foundation Trust (SCCO 17/01/2017) Master Brown declined to follow the decision of Master Gordon-Saker in BNM v MGN [2016] EWHC B13, agreeing with the later decision of Master…
Read more…The relationship between the (new) CPR 44.3(5) proportionality test and additional liabilities remains uncertain. In King v Basildon & Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Master Rowley stated that the rules were written with the expectation there would be no recoverable additional liabilities. Consequently, the proportionality test should only apply to base costs as…
Read more…Regional Costs Judge, District Judge Lumb in the case of Merrix v Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWHC B28 (QB) (13 October 2016) considered to what extent, if at all, does the costs budgeting regime fetter the costs judge’s powers and discretion at detailed assessment. The judgment concerned this preliminary issue that arose…
Read more…Costs Lawyer Andy Ellis, Managing Director of costs firm Practico, acting for MGN in the appeal of BNM v MGN that will consider how deeply reasonable costs and additional liabilities can be cut by reference to proportionality, reports the case has been leapfrogged to the Court of Appeal; and if expedition means expedition then a…
Read more…Asked if Court of Appeal guidance is needed on the proportionality rule whilst addressing the Law Society civil litigation section conference, Master Fontaine and District Judge Etherington alluded to: The costs system as a whole is suffering from inconsistency… and uncertainty about proportionality has added to the mix. It is not just costs budgeting where…
Read more…In June we blogged on the case of BNM v MGN when Master Gordon-Saker held that the proportionality test applies to additional liabilities Click here to re-read Attain blog. The decision is now being appealed, so watch this space. Attain will keep you informed of progress. Attain are capable of handling all civil litigation costing…
Read more…In Various Claimants v MGN Limited the High Court decided that the determination of the figures in the budget shall not include any sum for additional liabilities. Facts: Costs budgets had been agreed earlier in the proceedings but did not cover the entire litigation to trial. Further budgets were exchanged but not through to…
Read more…In Socrates Training Ltd v The Law Society of England & Wales Judgment The Competition Appeal Tribunal was considering costs capping where the claimant, a SME with a turnover of £750k was bringing a claim for abuse of dominant position by the Law Society. Damages were quantified between £112k and £500k which meant the case…
Read more…Following on from three recent blogs dealing with this handle in question, it is clear that proportionality is the maxim when dealing with costs. The cases of BNM v MGN Ltd [2016] EWHC B13 (Costs) and May & Anor v Wavell Group Plc & Anor [2016] EWHC B16, are a stark warning to litigators. If…
Read more…