header-logo header-logo

04 September 2008
Issue: 7335 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Costs law update

The costs team at Kings Chambers explains the principles underlying protective costs orders

The Court of Appeal in R (on the application of Compton) v Wiltshire Primary Care Trust [2008] EWCA Civ 749, [2008] All ER (D) 12 (Jul) has recently refined the principles concerning protective costs orders. Protective costs orders (PCOs) are a type of pre-emptive costs order which (generally speaking) are only available in public law claims. Unlike other pre-emptive costs orders (such as costs capping orders), their aim is not solely to control extravagant expenditure; instead, their aim is to protect litigants who reasonably bring public law proceedings in the public interest from the liability of an adverse costs order in the event that they lose. That said, PCOs can, and often do, impose a cap on the recoverable costs.

Principles matter

The principles guiding these types of orders were established by Mr Justice Dyson (as he then was) in the pre-CPR case of R v Lord Chancellor ex parte Child Poverty Action Group [1998] 2 All ER 755. Following the advent of the CPR those principles were affirmed and summarised by Mr

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll