header-logo header-logo

Costs—Order for costs

03 November 2017
Issue: 7768 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Agyemang) v Haringey London Borough Council [2017] EWCA Civ 1630, [2017] All ER (D) 145 (Oct)

There would be no order for costs in the case of a publicly funded claimant whose case against the defendant local authority had been settled. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division held that on the facts it was impossible to predict whether the claimant would have obtained the subsistence payments she had been seeking and therefore the case fell within the second limb of the test in R (M) v Croydon London Borough Council.

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

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn Premium Content

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Magic circle firms, in-house legal departments and litigation firms alike are embracing more flexible ways to manage surges of workloads, the success of Flex Legal has shown

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

back-to-top-scroll