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

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
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
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’
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
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
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
back-to-top-scroll