Appealing the budget? You’ll be lucky!
Havenga v Gateshead NHS Foundation Trust  5 Costs LO 573 HHJ Freedman
The appellate court needs to be entirely confident that the court below has erred seriously in principle in relation to an assessment of an overall costs budget or any element in it before it would be appropriate to intervene and potentially substitute some other figure. That is so even if the appellate court might have been a little more generous than the court below.
Churchill v Boot  4 Costs LO 559 Picken J
Appeal against the refusal to amend the budget from £114,000 to £239,643. Held on refusing permission to appeal: The fact that the claim had doubled in size from £1 million to £2 million since the original costs budget had been set, that the trial had been adjourned for a period of 6 to 9 months as a result of an order made in January 2015, and that further disclosure had been ordered by the court, did not necessarily mean nor did it justify an increase in costs. An adjournment, of itself, does not always amount to a significant development and the further disclosure was standard for this sort of case.