TEST CASES AND APPEALS
Our team has long been at the cutting edge of advancements in the law of costs. From our experience at the coal face of costs we have identified the important issues arising from successive waves of rule changes.
We strategically pursue test cases for early resolution and guidance on those issues, saving thousands of pounds for our clients where issues would otherwise keep coming up again and again.
We have been in many of the most important costs cases of the last two decades, including:
- Bird v Acorn Group  1 WLR 1915
- Costin v Merron  3 Costs LR 391
- Dockerill v Tullett  1 WLR 2092
- Engeham v London and Quadrant Housing  EWCA Civ 1530
- Hislop v Perde (pending in the Court of Appeal)
- Kilby v Gawith  1 WLR 853
- Mendes v Hochtief  EWHC 976 (QB)
- Nizami v Butt  1 WLR 3307
- Solomon v Cromwell  1 WLR 1048
- Tasleem v Beverley  1 WLR 3567
We are different to other firms that may claim expertise in this area. Other firms end up as the post box for specialist counsel who does the heavy work, and that approach builds up considerable fees. In contrast, we give our own clear advice on the law and the merits.
We prepare appeal papers and skeleton arguments in house. We involve counsel only where it is economic or prudent to do so, typically to appear as advocate in court. We often find the court orders our opponent to pay our fees as claimed.
We have special expertise in procedural points, which are crucially important as the successive waves of new costs rules bed in. Our work supplying data to the Ministry of Justice and the fixed costs reviews mean that we are often well placed to anticipate issue before they arise.
We offer City standards at regional prices. Our team is outstanding in the field.
If you need help with an important test case or appeal, please contact lead director Matthew Hoe.
WE HAVE SPECIAL EXPERTISE IN PROCEDURAL POINTS, WHICH ARE CRUCIALLY IMPORTANT AS THE SUCCESSIVE WAVES OF NEW COSTS RULES BED IN.
DO YOU NEED ADVICE?
TAKE A LOOK AT