|
Willis v Nicolson, CA (Civ Div) 13/03/2007
The court made general observations about costs capping orders, but concluded that it was for the Civil Procedure Rule Committee to decide whether to take up the issues that had been raised, in particular in relation to the difference of judicial opinion as to when and in what circumstances costs capping orders should be made.
Tamares (Vincent Square) Ltd v Fairpoint Properties (Vincent Square) Ltd, High Ct (Ch D) 09/03/2007
In the light of the special features of the instant case, despite being identified as the "winner" the claimant would be entitled to only 75 per cent of its costs.
Dadourian Group International Inc & Ors v Simms & Ors, High Ct (Ch D) 08/03/2007
Whilst the outcome of the parties' separate claims was different, the issues and the evidence were so inextricably intertwined that it was not appropriate to make an issue-based costs order and it was preferable to instead impose a percentage reduction of the claimants' costs which they could otherwise recover to reflect the defendants' success in certain issues.
Various Claimants v Gower Chemicals Ltd & Ors, CC (Cardiff) 28/02/2007
The natural and ordinary meaning of the Collective Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 reg.5(1) was that there had to be a provision in a collective conditional fee agreement providing for a success fee that complied with the specification set out in the regulation, but it did not additionally require the performance of the prescribed condition.
|
