The Court of Appeal has delivered a positive costs judgment for personal injury solicitors in small value cases.
In Anthony Mitchell (Executor of the estate of Kenneth Morris) v Burton [2021] EWCA Civ 1005, solicitors for Mr Morris (deceased) notified the road accident claim in the MOJ portal. No admission of liability was made and soon afterwards Mr Morris died of an unrelated cause.
The pilot scheme for the new N260B Statement of Costs form is to be extended. It was originally planned to run until 31 March 2021 but has been extended by a year during which time the consultation on Practice Direction 51X will continue.
In response to the defendant's arguments advocating budgeting Master Davison stated in Smith v W Ford & Sons (Contractors) Ltd [2021] 1749 (QB) that there is no evidence that the detailed assessment process is not adequately controlling costs in asbestos cases. He went on to say that if asbestos cases (where budgeting is usually disapplied) were compared to other industrial disease cases that were budgeted, he would be surprised if there was much or any difference.
The High Court has upheld a County Court decision to award the claimants their costs (estimated at £200,000) following a trial in which they were awarded damages of £10.
In Raubenheimer v Slater & Gordon UK Limited the claimant made a request for disclosure of any payments made to Slater & Gordon. No details were not provided and so the claimant made a Part 18 request under the Solicitors Act seeking a breakdown of a £254 ATE premium together with details of direct payments made to Slater & Gordon. In support, the claimant produced correspondence between the ATE provider, Elite and the claimant's costs representative, which appeared to show payments made by Elite to Slater & Gordon and which were not disclosed to the client. Slater & Gordon served a statement only confirming that an ATE premium had been paid in accordance with its cash account.
Liverpool firm SGI has successfully appealed the decision of DJ Bellamy to limit the costs it charged its client to those it recovered from third party insurers. Overturning the original decision in SGI Legal v Karatysz, Mr Justice Bellamy ruled that the limitation decision of the lower court was wrong.
A fabulous evening at the European Diversity Awards 2023. Congratulations to all of the winners,...
Denovo legal services were in attendance at the The British Diversity Awards which took place on...
We are proud to announce that we will be sponsoring the British Diversity Awards 2022. The awards...
We are proud to announce that we will be sponsoring the European Diversity Awards 2021. The awards...
The Denovo Legal Service Marketing Campaign of the Year Award was presented to the winners...
Denovo Legal Services is pleased to be sponsoring the outstanding LGBTQI Network of the Year Award at...
A memorable evening at the Bank of London Rainbow Honours awards last week. Although the focus of...
Denovo attended a fundraiser for Kate Osborne MP on 19 March. Bell Ribiero-Addi (Streatham) Fran...
Education/admissions
Afqar is involved in the firm's diversity initiatives and a keen advocate for social mobility and opportunities for all.
Afqar was amongst the first in our profession become a regulated Costs Lawyer. He enjoys rights of audience in relation all costs proceedings.
Afqar is also an accredited training provider.
Experience and notable cases
Kuwait Airways Corporation (KAC) –v- Iraqi Airways Company (IAC) – Following the longest running commercial case in the history of the English courts I prepared KAC’s massive costs claim, one the largest ever to reach the doors of the Senior Courts Costs Office. Legal costs claim of >£40M.
Pharma patent litigation – I was instructed by a leading global law firm on behalf of the successful parties in patent infringement and revocation proceedings involving some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies. Legal costs claim of >£5M.
Telecoms patent litigation – I was instructed by a top tier specialist firm of patent litigators to prepare various complex costs statements following trials and appeals involving some of the world’s largest technology corporations. Legal costs claim of >£10M.
High-profile costs claim following failed £100M civil recovery proceedings – instructed by a market leading international litigation team acting for a foreign citizen whose worldwide assets were subject of a civil recovery claim brought by the National Crime Agency (NCA). My team and I prepared a number of high value interrelated claims for costs on behalf of the successful party . Legal costs claim of >£5M.
Excalibur Ventures v Texas Keystone – The case generated several decisions of wider importance in the legal costs field (relating to security for costs, indemnity costs, and the availability of a non-party costs order against professional funders – a point on which the Association of Litigation Funders also intervened). I prepared the successful party's costs breakdowns and provided witness statements in support of its security for costs applications. Following the conclusion of the substantive litigation I prepared the defendant’s £20M> costs breakdown.
Challenge to remuneration and expenses of joint administrators – instructed by a market leading international litigation team: I was instructed to prepare a detailed challenge to the charges of a global financial consultancy and their advisers (including two high-profile international law firms), in connection with the administration of a UK energy supplier. The application for assessment of fees and expenses of >£5M under the Insolvency Act 1986 was the first significant challenge of its kind in 20 years.
Education
LLB (Hons) – University of London (1994)
LLM (Distinction) – University of East Anglia (2018)
PhD (law) - University of East Anglia (2024)
Professional and research interests: Costs law and practice, litigation funding, responsibility theory, vicarious liability, products liability, litigation practice, philosophical foundations of tort law. My doctoral thesis examined relationships between (pre-moral, pre-legal) outcome responsibility and strict tortious obligations of repair. Time permitting, future research output will address aspects of costs law and practice, third party litigation funding, as well as approaches to responsibility for harm caused by intelligent products (for ‘algorithmic accidents’).
