header-logo header-logo

21 June 2007 / Dr Mr Friston , Prof A Mcgee , P Hughes , M Smith
Issue: 7278 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

Costs Law Brief

WHO BEARS THE COSTS OF THE COSTS WAR?

In Myatt and others v National Coal Board [2007] EWCA Civ 307, [2007] ALL ER (D) 301 (Mar) the Court of Appeal dealt with the issue of who should pay the costs of an appeal concerning the enforceability of the claimants’ conditional fee agreements (CFAs). The claimants had lost that appeal (see Myatt and others v National Coal Board [2006] EWCA Civ 1017) and the issue was who should pay the defendants’ costs: should the costs be paid by the claimants themselves, or by their solicitors?

The claimants had no insurance in respect of the appeal because their after the event (ATE) insurance was itself conditional upon their conditional fee agreements being enforceable. Had this not been the case, the defendant would have been content with an order against the claimants themselves, but in view of the fact that the claimants were uninsured, the defendant had no option but

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll