In a rare decision by the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, the fixed intellectual property scale costs ordinarily applicable were disapplied – but why?

LINK UP MITAKA LIMITED trading as THEBIGWORD -v- LANGUAGE EMPIRE LIMITED & YASAR ZAMAN   The Rules Section IV of CPR 45 provides for scale costs for claims in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court. The practice direction sets out the maximum amount that can be awarded at each stage in the proceedings. However, CPR 45.30…

The importance of attendance notes, a Judicial Reminder to be precise in the recording of all communications

In the recent case of Mr Douglas Hague v British Telecommunications Plc attention has been drawn to the importance of attendance notes in supporting agreements between the parties when a point is contested. The circumstances of this claim pertain to the Claimant, Mr Douglas Hague, who was diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Settlement was achieved…

Holmes: A Study in Conduct

Holmes v West London Mental Health Trust In this exceptionally serious case of mismanagement of a Claimant resulting in Lithium poisoning, the Judge examined the Part 36 rules when considering the appropriate order to make on costs liability resulting in an award of indemnity costs for the Claimant. The case is indeed some welcome news…

QOCS Induced, Damages Lost: “Successful” Defendants able to recover costs from Claimant’s damages recovered from “Unsuccessful” Defendants in NIHL case.

Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654 The above case was originally heard by Regional Costs Judge Hale and was then leapfrogged to the Court of Appeal.  The upshot is that “successful” Defendants can take advantage of the sums paid to the Claimant by an “unsuccessful” Defendant, but not when the matter settles…