LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
In addressing the challenge of stalled litigation, the Civil Procedure Rules provide an extensive legal framework designed to facilitate swift and just resolution of cases. Central to this framework is the overriding objective of the CPR, which mandates that cases should be handled justly and at proportionate cost.
We successfully represented a client in a significant cryptocurrency loan dispute. On 2 July 2024, the High Court handed down a judgment varying the valuation date for assessing damages in lieu of specific performance. Initially, the County Court had set the valuation date at the breach in 2019, which did not account for the significant increase in Ethereum’s value.
A litigation funding report for the Legal Services Board evaluates UK litigation funding. It finds such funding can improve access to justice, facilitate consumer interest cases, and support a healthy legal market. However, it identifies the problems of highly limited, highly selective funding, potential cost tensions, and the need for robust AML controls.
The ruling in Glaser KC & Miller v Atay [2023] EWHC 2539 (KB) affects individuals who have instructed direct access barristers and had to pay fixed fees even if a trial did not go ahead. The judge’s verdict rendered this inherently unfair term effectively null and void with no quantum meruit fallback.
Unless Orders are judicial directives that can force a non-compliant party to comply with a previous court order. Specifically, in the context of outstanding costs orders, Unless Orders can help ensure financial obligations are paid out.
Deputy Costs Judge Joseph in the case of Coram v D R Dunthorn & Son Ltd [2023] EWHC 731 (SCCO) affirmed that the costs of instructing leading counsel for a three-day trial were not recoverable as they were deemed unreasonable and disproportionate for a case with a maximum value of £115,000 (settled for £75,000).
An award of indemnity costs might give a party in a lawsuit a major advantage, due to the fact that the paying party will be responsible for the legal expenses and the proportionality criterion will not be applied. Since costs on the standard basis are the norm, the indemnity costs principle (included in Civil Procedure Rules 44.3(3)) can be considered punitive in nature.
Making a strategic Part 36 offer is a powerful tool in UK litigation. It provides a pressure for the other side to settle the dispute early, potentially saving both sides significant time and costs. By carefully calculating the offer and timing it correctly, you can increase the likelihood of a favourable settlement. If the offer is rejected and you ultimately win a better judgment, Part 36 offers significant financial advantages, including increased costs recovery, interest, and potentially a percentage of damages. Ultimately, a well-crafted Part 36 offer can strengthen your negotiating position and improve your overall chances of success in UK litigation.
If you have been charged a very high fee by a solicitor you are able to challenge the fairness and reasonableness utilising the Solicitors Act 1974. However delay in taking action could reduce or eliminate prospects of recovery. If the sum involved is high value, we and counsel could (after a paid review) act on a no win no fee basis where we are only paid if we succeed.
The Respondent to an application to set aside a statutory demand must bear the costs of the application, even if they withdrew the demand shortly after the application was filed.