Keoghs Insight


Howard Dean

Howard Dean


T:0247 665 8136

Costs Aware Issue 3


Our third issue of Costs Aware contains articles focusing on some of the current key issues, from costs budgeting behaviours to the new proportionality test.

AWARE 22/06/2017

FRC verification and negotiation

The importance of accurate costs verification and negotiation will significantly increase when the forthcoming multi track extension of fixed recoverable costs is implemented.

AWARE 22/06/2017

Be careful what you wish for

From 1 October 2017, practitioners will be able to use a new electronic bill of costs in detailed assessment proceedings (this may become mandatory by April 2018).  Howard Dean, who sat on the Civil Procedures Rules Committee working party for the implementation of the new bill of costs, outlines what this means in practice.

AWARE 22/06/2017

Challenging pre LASPO ATE premiums

ATE premiums incepted after 1st April 2013, save for exceptions in relation to certain types of cases, ceased to be recoverable between parties as a result of the changes introduced by LASPO.  However, there are many thousands of cases still running under the old regime which often raise contentious issues surrounding reasonableness, necessity and proportionality.

AWARE 22/06/2017

Escape the box?

Howard Dean examines the review of fixed recoverable costs currently underway with Lord Justice Jackson and what may happen subsequent to the report being published.

AWARE 22/06/2017

Proportionality - what exactly is going on?

Ever since the Jackson Reforms, legal practitioners have been in a state of uncertainty regarding how exactly the judiciary intend to give effect to the new definition of proportionality and the new test found at CPR 44.3(5).  Ben Petrecz examines the issues involved.

AWARE 22/06/2017

Costs budgeting is not a game!

Coulson J criticised defendant for treating costs budgeting as a form of game in which they sought to exploit the costs budgeting rules in the hope of obtaining tactical advantage.

AWARE 22/06/2017

ATE Premiums: Proportionate or not?

The clinical negligence exception to the LASPO Act 2012 abolition of recoverability of ATE premiums has resulted in a series of conflicting decisions as to the application of the new test of proportionality and the relevance of Rogers v Merthyr Tydfil CBC [2006] EWCA Civ 1134.

AWARE 22/06/2017

Costs implications for the unwary

The Court of Appeal in Tibbles v SIG PLC (T/A Asphaltic Roofing Supplies) [2012] EWCA Civ 518 highlighted the implications of allocation to track and the implications on costs and thereafter the importance of timely applications if seeking to vary costs orders under CPR 3.1 (7).