Costs

Dominic Regan crowns his case of the year with a cut-out-and-keep guide, plus highlights some bumper judgments to read as the nights draw in

Jane Risley analyses a recent ruling with implications for cost recovery for interested parties

Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School and the Frenkel Topping Group—AKA The insider—crowns Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP as his case of 2025 in his latest column for NLJ. The High Court’s decision—that non-authorised employees cannot conduct litigation, even under supervision—has sent shockwaves through the profession. Regan calls it the year’s defining moment for civil practitioners and reproduces a ‘cut-out-and-keep’ summary of key rulings from Mr Justice Sheldon

In this week's issue of NLJ, Emma Brunning and Dharshica Thanarajasingham of Birketts unpack the high-conflict financial remedy case TF v SF [2025] EWHC 1659 (Fam). The husband’s conduct—described by the judge as a ‘masterclass in gaslighting’—included hiding a £9.5m deferred payment from the sale of a port acquired post-separation. Despite his claims that the port was non-matrimonial, the court found its value rooted in marital assets and efforts

David Bailey-Vella of Davis Woolfe and chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers explores the new costs budgeting light pilot scheme in this week's NLJ

A port, a masterclass in gaslighting, & identifying assets acquired post-separation: Emma Brunning & Dharshica Thanarajasingham present TF v SF

David Bailey-Vella breaks down the costs budgeting light pilot

Costs lawyers could become judges and would be recognised as higher fee earners in the guideline hourly rates, under proposals set out by their professional body

People bringing collective actions should always instruct costs specialists to help them scrutinise their lawyers’ fees, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has declared

Writing in NLJ this week, columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School surveys a month of judicial impatience with poor litigation practices