It was just to make a third party costs order against a non-party whose actions were responsible for effectively depriving a claimant of any realistic opportunity of recovering its costs.
|
A pre-action disclosure order was made where it would offer a real prospect of achieving the objective of more focused proceedings.
|
Where a claimant in a personal injury action had initially issued proceedings before the time limit had expired and had brought a second action in respect of the same injuries after expiry, the court could use its discretion under the Limitation Act 1980 s.33 to dis-apply the three-year time limit. The decision in Walkley v Precision Forgings Limited (1979) 1 WLR 606 was overruled, as it had deprived claimants of a right that Parliament had intended them to have, and had given rise to much unsat ...
|
By murdering the opposing party, who was a vital witness to the litigation, the defendant had rendered a fair trial no longer possible and had denied himself the right to proceed with his defence and counterclaim.
|
The judge had taken into account all relevant factors when awarding interest on indemnity costs and had correctly exercised his discretion in the level of interest awarded.
|
The principles relating to costs capping orders laid down in King v Telegraph Group Ltd (2004) EWCA Civ 613 , (2005) 1 WLR 2282, a defamation case, were not applicable to all litigation. In the instant case the fact that the claimant was instructing solicitors under a conditional fee agreement without after the event insurance cover was not enough in itself to justify a costs capping order being made.
|
It was not appropriate to make a wasted costs order against solicitors who had acted for the claimant in an action that had been discontinued. The defendant had not made out an allegation that no reasonably competent solicitor could have concluded that the claimant had any realistic prospect of establishing that she had been under a disability for limitation purposes during the relevant period.
|
Fees charged by medical reporting agencies for supplying medical reports and records were recoverable as disbursements under the CPR r.45.10(2) provided that they were reasonable and proportionate.
|
Costs of amendment applications. Under the CPR the costs of any amendment application that ought to have been consented to would be visited against the opposing party. It behoved parties in litigation to be sensible about applications by the other side and not unreasonably refuse.
|
A claim alleging that the second and eighth defendants had participated in a conspiracy to defraud had been sufficiently pleaded and it would not be appropriate to strike it out.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |