header-logo header-logo

15 January 2018 / David Wright
Issue: 7778 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Cutting costs when costs are fixed

nlj_7778_wright

David Wright on escaping from the fixed costs regime

  • The quest to escape limitations on costs recovery has produced an abundance of case law.

Since the expansion of the various fixed costs regimes in 2013, the quest of receiving parties to escape limitations on costs recovery has produced an abundance of case law, particularly in the lower courts.

One often cited is the decision of regional costs judge Besford in the case of Sutherland v Khan (2016). In that case it was successfully argued that a defendant accepting a Pt 36 offer out of time would be liable to pay the claimant's standard basis costs from the date of its expiry, unconstrained by the fixed costs regime.

Whalley v Advantage Insurance

For a time, Sutherland v Khan proved to be a useful avenue for claimants, until DJ Besford was asked to revisit the issue in the recent case of Whalley v Advantage Insurance [2017]. The case involved a road traffic accident with a dispute as to liability.

Prior to the exchange

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