Nicholas Lee of Paragon Costs Solutions and James Wibberley of Guildhall Chambers were instructed to represent the Defendant in these costs proceedings.
Between them our team have a wealth of experience. Call us on 0845 160 9595.
Latest News
From 1 November 2022 to 28 April 2023, a pilot was in place for the use of electronic bills in Court of Protection (COP) claims. The trial was a marked success, resulting in the continuation of these bills being accepted by the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) moving forwards.
In the matter of Briley & Ors v Leicester Partnership NHS Trust & Ors [2023] EWHC 1470 (SCCO), the recoverability of attending a pre-inquest review was considered.
In Sleaford Building Services Ltd v Isoplus Pipings Systems Ltd, the Court considered the validity of a Part 36 offer made and whether the offer was a genuine attempt to settle the claim.
Wishing you a disproportionately Happy Festive break (on the standard basis) and a Happy New Year (without prejudice save as to costs). This offer is open for acceptance for 21 days (the “relevant period”).
Simpsons (Preston) Ltd & Anor v MS Amlin Underwriting Ltd [2023] EWHC 1370 (Comm) and the variation of costs budgets when the issue is self-imposed
IEH v Powell [2023] EWHC 1037 and the late acceptance of a Part 36 offer when the Claimant is a child suffering with brain damage.
The dangers of unjustified allegations within a Letter of Claim
In the matter of Brierley v Outo & Ors, Costs Judge Nagalingam gave consideration to the paying parties’ application that the receiving party’s Bill of Costs should be redrawn as one of the fee earners named did not have the necessary years of experience.
The differences between a summary assessment on the standard basis and a solicitor/client assessment on the indemnity basis
- Page 2 of 5