header-logo header-logo

17 February 2017
Issue: 7734 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Summary assessment on decree

I have adopted a practice on applications for decree nisi where there is an unopposed prayer for costs of lodging a statement of costs and asking for summary assessment so that a costs order for the assessed sum can be made on pronouncement of decree but there is judicial resistance to this. What is the problem?

In principle, there is no reason why a party should not seek summary assessment of costs claimed on the grant of a decree under the standard (undefended) procedure. However, the usual time period of 24 hours for serving a schedule of costs (CPR PD 44, para 9.5(4)) will not be sufficient to enable the other party to attend and make representations, since at least 14 days’ notice must be given of an intention to attend (FPR 7.21(2)). If summary assessment is to be sought this must be made clear when the application for decree nisi is made so that a suitable time estimate can be given for the assessment to be conducted on pronouncement or at a separate hearing and the schedule should be filed at the same

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