header-logo header-logo

22 February 2012
Issue: 7502 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Good news for costs claimants

Costs run from date of costs order where claimant is CFA-funded

Costs run from the date of the costs order even where the claimant is funded by a conditional fee agreement (CFA) and not from the date the sum is formally agreed, the Court of Appeal ruled last week.

In Simcoe v Jacuzzi UK Group Plc [2012] EWCA Civ 137, the parties were divided over the question of the date from which interest on costs should run on an award of costs to the claimant, and whether the fact the claimant was funded by a CFA gave the judge reason to order otherwise.

The defendant argued that interest should run from the later date on which the sum of the costs was formally agreed.

The court held in favour of the claimants, finding that part of CPR 40.8 is ultra vires in the county court and, until that discrepancy is resolved, a judge in the county court has no discretion to order otherwise. In the county court and the High Court, interest runs from the date of the costs order.
The court also held that the fact the claimant is on a CFA and is therefore not out-of-pocket as a result of the case is not a good reason to order otherwise.

Writing in the March issue of the Civil Costs Newsletter, Roger Mallalieu of 4 New Square, who represented the claimant, says: “The judgment will be good news for claimant solicitors.

“Interest has long provided an annual source of income and has been part of the calculations on which many financial models have been based. In these straitened times, where solicitors acting on CFAs are already facing many changes and strains on their business models, it would have been sorely missed.”

Lord Neuberger, Master of the Rolls, concluded his judgment by criticising the fact it costs the claimant nearly £75,000 to pursue a “relatively minor and straightforward” personal injury case for £12,750 damages.

“Unless this is an exceptional case, the fact that, without even incurring the cost of a trial, it cost the claimant nearly six times as much to pursue the claim as it was actually worth suggests that something is out of kilter in at least some parts of the civil justice system,” he said.

Simcoe was the appeal against Judge Stewart QC’s judgment in Gray v Toner at Liverpool County Court in November 2010.

Issue: 7502 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

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