21 Costs Flashcards
What is costs shifting?
Winner will want to obtain order for costs (“costs shifting”), recovering costs from losing party.
Costs shifting = costs “of and incidental” to proceedings.
Once claim started – recoverable costs inc costs incurred before claim issued which are RELATED to dispute. But NOT costs of issues dropped during pre-action protocol stage or stand-alone ADR process (Esp if pre-issue).
Are costs mandatory?
NO- Costs are ALWAYS DISCRETIONARY
What is the general rule with costs?
Gen rule: Loser pays winner (“costs follow the event”).
A costs order should:
- State which party has to pay costs to the other;
- State which percentage of costs are to be paid
- Deal with how much is payable.
Must the reasons for costs order be stated?
REASONS = Reasons for costs orders MUST be clearly stated. Counsel have duty to ask judge for note of reasons for costs order if reasons cant be discerned.
What is the amount for costs?
AMOUNT =
- Parties may agree
- Court may make summary assessment at hearing
- Court may make detailed assessment after hearing
For amount for costs, the costs order must state:
basis of assessment: either:
- Standard basis
- Indemnity basis
- E.g amount lose MUST pay is a max – not to make profit but gives money back at max.
What is the general rule for
COSTS FOLLOW THE EVENT?
unsuccessful party pays successful party’s costs = costs follow the event, inc where successful party unsuccessful on some issues or finding of contributory negligence.
What happens with costs where there is a claim and counterclaim?
Winner is awarded costs against loser. If C wins claim = D wins counterclaim, these two costs orders MAY be set-off against each other. If costs order is split with costs of claim + counterclaim being different = judge is NOT allowed to apportion costs, but attribute each item (“divide”) to either claim/counterclaim. Trial judge should be involved to make a percentage costs order = “special order” for costs.
Factors for BUllock /Sanderson order
If C wins against D1, but loses against D2, court has DISCRETION, applying OO, to make a Bullock or Sanderson order. Factors:
- If joining both D1 and D2 was reasonable
- Whether claims against D1 and D2 were in alternative
- Degree to which claims against D1 and D2 were connected
- One D blaming the other
- C didn’t know which D1 or D2 was at fault
Bullock order – C wants this!
what is it
D1 pays C costs of claim
C pays D2 costs of claim
D1 reimburses C the costs C paid to D2.
NOT D1 because they pay everyone’s costs.
Sanderson order
what is this?
D1 pays C costs
D1 pays D2 costs of claim between C and D2
Here D2 is protected! Most appropriate where C:publically funded or insolvent
What order should a court make?
Bullock or Sanderson?
Court has DISCRETION of which order to make. Dominant consideration: whether original joinder of D2 was reasonable. If unreasonable – C cannot seek to pass costs payable by him to D2 over to D1.
In deciding what order to make about courts, court MUST have regard to
Costs are DISCRETIONARY. Gen rule: loser pays winner costs.
— Regard to all the circumstances:
- Conduct of all parties
- Whether a party succeeded in part of case
- Any admissible offer to settle drawn to court’s attention + not offer to which costs consequences under Part 36 apply.
What is “Conduct”?
in costs?
- Conduct before, as well as during proceedings
- Whether reasonable for a party to raise, pursue or contest allegation/issue
- Manner party pursued/defended something
- Where C who succeeded in claim exaggerated its claim.
NOT intended to be exhaustive. NOT mutually exclusive.
Must the court take into account any Part 36 order in deciding costs?
NO - THEY CANNOT
May the court take account of any admisisble offer NOT Part 36 offer?
NO - it is a MUST
MUST the court take account of any admisisble offer NOT Part 36 offer?
YES! - NOT MAY
What are the types of offer?
Types of offer:
- “Calderbank offer”: written offer to settle “without prejudice save as to costs”.
- “Open offer”: admissible evidence at trial
Failing to beat Calderbank offer MAY result = winner may offeror’s costs from date winner should have responded to Calderbank offer.
A non-Part 36 offer is NOT a Part 36 offer.
What is: Partial success (“issues based approach”)
Where winner succeeds on overall merits, but loses on a no. distinct issues, court can make an “issues-based” costs order, e.g. winner recovers costs on issues won.
Allocating costs causes problems at assessment stage = NOT usual. Partial success on issues = norm give winner percentage of full costs.
Guidelines on costs following partial success:
- Issue-based costs order
- Winner be deprived of costs on that issue
- Winner be deprived proportion of costs
- Winner be deprived costs between specified dates
- Winner pay part of loser’s costs
What are interim costs orders??
If “winner” judge considers making summary assessment.
Costs/Costs in any event
define
Party in whose favour order made = entitled to party’s costs whatever other costs order made
Costs in the case/Costs in the application
define
Party in whose favour court makes order for costs @ end of proceedings
Costs reserved
define
decision of costs deferred to later occasion