Carlisle Legal Costing

About Us

National firm of Law Costs Draftsmen, experienced in commercial litigation, professional negligence and personal injury matters. We offer a complete service, advising on all costs and funding related issues, drafting budgets and case plans, preparing Bills of Costs, Points of Dispute and Replies to Points of Dispute, Advocacy and Negotiations. We routinely appear in the Supreme Court Costs Office along with all other courts nationwide.

Costs Law Update

The world of costs law moves rapidly, and it is difficult for legal practitioners to keep up. Regular updates can be found at http://www.carlislelegalcosting.co.uk/. Here is a sample of our own recent successes. Gascoigne v Next PLC, Liverpool County CourtThis was a claim for personal injury and loss arising from an accident at work. At the time of the accident the Claimant was temporarily living with his parents. The Claimant did not possess any relevant insurance policies and was not a member of a trade union. An agent was instructed and attended upon the Claimant at his parents' home. A CFA and Oral Advice/Fact Finding sheet was completed and the Claimant confirmed that he did not possess any relevant insurance policies and signed the sheet and the CFA. During the course of the Detailed Assessment Proceedings, the Defendant argued that the Claimant's father had a mortgage which may have provided LEI cover for all family members and that the question should have been asked in addition to the questions detailed on the Oral Advice sheet. At the initial Detailed Assessment hearing it was determined that the Defendant had raised a genuine issue and the Claimant was ordered to file evidence. A witness statement on behalf of the Claimant and his Solicitor were filed. Skeleton Arguments were prepared prior to the final Assessment hearing. It was the Claimant's case that it would not have been reasonable or proportionate to embark upon a treasure hunt in investigating whether the Claimant's family members may or may not have any form of BTE that could have afforded cover. The claim settled in the sum of £2,000.00. The Claimant relied on the case of Sarwar-v-Alam.The Claimant further relied upon the Garrett & Myatt Appeals in which it was held that the nature of the claim may be relevant if it were such that it was unlikely that standard insurance policies would provide legal expenses cover. The Claimant maintained that given that the claim related to an accident at work it was reasonable to not pursue the investigations into BTE further, as third party cover under any of his parents' policies was remote.The Court was satisfied that proportionate and reasonable investigations were made having regard to the nature of the claim and the CFA was upheld. The Defendant was ordered to pay the costs of assessment.Sette v Montgomery, Bristol County CourtClient had pursued a claim for damages for personal injury following a road traffic accident. As quantum could not be agreed, proceedings were commenced following which a settlement was reached. The Defendants argued that proceedings had unnecessarily been commenced and sought to restrict costs to those prescribed by CPR 45 II. It was successfully argued that the court had no discretion to award prescribed costs and that the bill was to be assessed on the standard basis.Larger cases of note not dealt with by us include Mastercigars v Withers. Following the original decision (details at www.carlislelegalcosting.co.uk), W appealed contending that the Judge had erred in (1) concluding that M had shown how it relied on the estimate; (2) concluding that M did not have to show that it had relied on the estimate to its detriment; (3) when determining the effect of such reliance on the assessment if the amount of costs which it was reasonable to pay. It was held that the Judge was not wrong to conclude that M had relied on the estimate, nor was it not necessary for the client to prove detriment. However, it was determined that the Costs Judge's reason for selecting a 20% margin to be added on to the estimate was inadequate and gave the appearance of being arbitrary. Therefore, it was ordered that the matter should be referred to the Senior Costs Judge.

Specialist Services

We act for both paying and receiving parties, conducting matters from preparing Bills of Costs to Advocacy

Videos

Photos

Our Reviews

Be the first to review this business.

Special Offers

Map