header-logo header-logo

Costs spiral in £265 dispute

20 November 2008
Issue: 7346 / Categories: Legal News , Costs
printer mail-detail

Costs

Three Court of Appeal judges have criticised a case involving a dispute over £265, which cost more than £100,000 in lawyer’s fees. Peakman v Linbrooke Services Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1239, was heard over just eight days.

The court awarded the claimant David Peakman, a self-employed cable jointer, £1,145, which was less than he was claiming, and the defendant Linbrooke Services, a telecommunications company, £1,410 plus interest. The judgments were to be satisfied by the payment of £265 plus interest by Peakman to Linbrooke.

However, Peakman sought to appeal against the judge’s decision to make no order of costs.

Permission to appeal was granted. While the court would be reluctant to involve itself in the order for costs, it was arguable that an injustice had been done to Peakman.

In his judgment, Lord Justice Goldring says: “Relative to the sums involved the costs are enormous. Linbrooke’s costs below were estimated to be £32,700 before the costs of an eight day trial. Mr. Peakman’s costs were some £18,000. According to the Statement of Costs supplied to this court Mr Peakman’s costs of his appeal (taking into account the uplift on a conditional fee agreement) amount to £30,481.80.

“This is deeply troubling, not only for this case but as a reflection of the least satisfactory aspect of our civil justice system.”

Issue: 7346 / Categories: Legal News , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll