header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 April 2025 / Julian Caddick
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Features , Profession , Costs , Litigants in person
printer mail-detail

Costs: getting personal

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
214564
The complexities of costs proceedings can be a minefield for litigants in person. But the courts expect compliance with the rules, writes Julian Caddick
  • Considers the case of Mlundira v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 189 (KB), in which the LiP claimant had succeeded in judicial review proceedings regarding unlawful immigration detention.

For 50 years, the Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975 (as amended) has provided a mechanism for litigants in person (LiPs) to recover costs from other parties to proceedings. However, many LiPs fail to appreciate the complexities and intricacies of rules of court and common law, particularly when it comes to costs proceedings.

Under r 46.5 of the CPR, a LiP’s recoverable fees are limited to two-thirds of what they would have recovered if legally represented. This does not apply to disbursements, only recoverable fees. They are further restricted to an hourly rate of £19 per hour unless they can demonstrate evidence of financial loss in connection with time they have reasonably spent preparing their case. However, the February 2025 minutes

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

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll