header-logo header-logo

08 November 2024 / Sophie Houghton
Issue: 8093 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

High Court departs from conventional ‘costs in the case’ order

Sophie Houghton on why it doesn’t pay to put forward overly ambitious figures in costs budgets
  • Parties should not presume that following a costs management hearing a ‘costs in the case’ order will be made.

Recently there have been two decisions by Master Thornett sitting in the King’s Bench Division of the High Court in respect of the appropriate costs order to make following a costs management hearing. In both cases, the master made clear that it should not be presumed by the parties that an order for ‘costs in the case’ will be made following this type of hearing. Although an order for ‘costs in the case’ is frequently made at the end of a costs management hearing, parties may be in the habit of thinking that this will always happen, which is not the case.

Disproportionality

The first of these decisions is Worcester v Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB), which involved a clinical negligence claim concerning the defendant’s treatment of the claimant’s mental health. Following the issue of proceedings, there was a case management hearing

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll