Francis Kendall reports on a positive result for costs budgeting
- Signia Wealth Ltd v Marlborough Trust Company Ltd & Anor: a marked departure in approach by the court from the early days of the Jackson reforms and costs budgeting.
The widely reported chief Chancery master’s decision in Signia Wealth Ltd v Marlborough Trust Company Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 2141 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 85 (Aug) indicates a marked departure in approach by the court from the early days of the Jackson reforms and costs budgeting.
We can all recall the early flurry of exemptions from budgeting to include an initially much lower quantum threshold, coupled with various exemptions in types of case/courts where budgeting was applicable, mainly due to the workload and backlog faced by the courts. At its inception there was a clear reluctance from the courts and practitioners to costs budgeting and, the court at least, gives a clear marker in this case that budgeting is seen to be both working and desirable.
The case was described
