Kain Knight celebrate further solicitor/client costs success
In Bendriss v Nicholson Jones Sutton Solicitors Ltd [2024] EWHC 1100 (SCCO), Kain Knight Costs Lawyer, Mark Brighton, acted for the successful Defendant in an interlocutory application (in Solicitors Act 1974 detailed assessment proceedings) brought by the Claimant (legally represented by Checkmylegalfees) for specific disclosure for documents concerning (i) an ATE premium, (ii) communications with third party companies, including those between third party companies (iii) financial records of the Defendant and those of third party companies, and (iv) call recordings.
The ATE premium had mistakenly been included by the Defendant in the statutory bill as a ‘disbursement’ and the Claimant attempted to argue that, because of that erroneous inclusion it became assessable under the Act. Accordingly, the Claimant argued, disclosure pertaining to it must be provided. However, a challenge to the ATE premium had not been set out. Costs Judge Rowley found that, including the ATE premium in the statutory bill, does not somehow turn an item which has been found not to be a disbursement (see Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527 (03 April 2019)) into one.
In respect of the wide-ranging request for documents, the Court acknowledged that the Claimant’s spending of over £28,500 in order to challenge an ATE Premium of £392 was disproportionate. It was made clear that the Court is required to case manage proceedings in ways that may prevent parties from bringing their case as they would wish, which in this case included a criticism of the spending, doubts as to the relevance of the documents where no clear challenge had yet been made, and a reference to the remedy set out in Karatysz v SGL Legal LLP [2022] EWCA Civ 1388, which was to deprive Claimants of their costs.
The Claimant’s Application dismissed with costs payable to the Defendant.
Author:
Mark Brighton
Costs Lawyer, Head of Advocacy & Technical Manager
