Costs insights.
Costs case law and recovery tactics for claimant solicitor firms — housing disrepair, MoD NIHL, standard-basis costs, Points of Dispute, Precedent S and costs-only proceedings.
JXX v Archibald [2026] EWHC 2404 (SCCO): Who Pays the Costs of the MRO Dispute?
In JXX v Archibald [2026] EWHC 2404 (SCCO), Senior Costs Judge Rowley decided the costs consequences of the MRO fees litigation. Despite an approximately 40% reduction to the MRO fees in HLA, the claimants and MROs were treated as the successful parties and awarded the general costs of the MRO issues without a percentage reduction.
18 September 2026 · 14 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsBirmingham City Council v Lee [2008] EWCA Civ 891: Pre-Allocation Costs in Housing Disrepair
Birmingham City Council v Lee [2008] EWCA Civ 891 remains one of the most important costs decisions in Housing Disrepair litigation. It addresses what happens where a claim starts with outstanding repairs capable of taking it outside the small claims track, but the landlord completes those repairs before allocation. This guide explains the decision, its limits, and why Court v Beyond Housing Ltd confirmed its continuing relevance in 2026.
2 September 2026 · 16 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsProvisional Assessment in Housing Disrepair Costs: Why the Replies Matter
For most Housing Disrepair costs claims, provisional assessment is not an unusual procedural event at the end of a large dispute — it is the route the parties are likely to end up on. It is decided on the papers, so the Bill, the supporting documents and Precedent G have to do the work themselves, and there is usually nobody there to explain a weak item later.
27 August 2026 · 13 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsPart 36 in Housing Disrepair Costs: Which Rule Applies, and What Beating Your Own Offer Is Worth
Part 36 is mentioned on every housing disrepair costs file and explained on almost none of them. The first question is not what beating an offer is worth — it is which of the two rules applies, because CPR 36.24 modifies 36.17 rather than sitting beside it, and a fixed costs case does not produce indemnity costs at all.
27 August 2026 · 12 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsPre-Action Costs in Housing Disrepair: Does the Landlord Pay If It Settles Before Issue?
Housing disrepair claims settle before issue constantly, and landlords’ solicitors routinely treat the absence of proceedings as the absence of a costs liability. Paragraph 11 of the Pre-Action Protocol for Housing Conditions Claims says otherwise — but it is conditional, and the condition is where the argument actually happens.
27 August 2026 · 11 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesLM1 v Seacroft [2026]: Bill of Costs Struck Out Under the Medway Oil Principle
A £74,075.60 Bill of Costs was struck out after claiming costs beyond the receiving party’s entitlement. In LM1 Limited v Seacroft Film Investments Limited [2026] EWHC 2212 (Ch), the High Court considered the Medway Oil principle, CPR 47.7 and why delay and a lack of transparency can carry consequences even where a party ultimately succeeds.
26 August 2026 · 10 min readRead →Costs BudgetingCar-Wizard v Vixen: Can You Vary a Costs Budget During an Adjourned Trial?
A costs budget variation is not necessarily too late because judgment has been handed down. In Car-Wizard v Vixen the trial had not truly ended, the further work came from the court itself and the claimant applied before doing it — so the trial phase went up by £19,710. Read alongside Bassey v Whittaker, decided a week earlier, the boundary is now unusually clear.
24 August 2026 · 11 min readRead →Costs BudgetingBassey v Whittaker: No Costs Budget Variation Without a Significant Development
The High Court has confirmed that there is no general discretion to increase an approved costs budget where the CPR 3.15A significant-development threshold has not been met. A £238,350 variation failed because the developments relied on — further expert reports, rehabilitation, accommodation and the trial window — were within the reasonable contemplation of the parties when the budget was approved.
24 August 2026 · 11 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsVulnerable Claimants and Housing Disrepair Costs: When Is Additional Work Recoverable?
CPR 44.3(5)(f) expressly recognises additional work or expense caused by the vulnerability of a party or witness when assessing proportionality. But vulnerability does not make every additional attendance recoverable — and in XX v Jordan Young the court accepted vulnerability and still cut internal communications from £22,946.15 to £10,000.
24 August 2026 · 13 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesIndemnity Costs After a Costs Budget: What Baroness Lawrence v Associated Newspapers Means for Recovery
The High Court has considered what happens when indemnity costs are awarded in a costs-managed case. A £34.48 million costs claim against a £13.31 million approved position, a refused cap and a £9,544,355 payment on account — the approved budget stops being the CPR 3.18 ceiling, but the receiving party still has to show its costs were reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount.
22 August 2026 · 11 min readRead →Legal CostsN260 Statement of Costs: 2026 Guide to Summary Assessment, Deadlines and Recoverability
Form N260 is the statement of costs used where the court is asked to assess costs summarily. This 2026 guide covers when an N260 is required, the 24-hour and two-day deadlines, hourly rates and VAT, what happens after late service, where schedules actually get reduced, and the new Rolls Building Excel requirement.
20 August 2026 · 14 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesMagomedov v Rabinovich [2026]: Can the SCCO Order Security for the Costs of Detailed Assessment?
A decision refusing security to a paying party is simultaneously a reminder that the receiving party has a route to money before the assessment concludes — and most firms never ask for it.
20 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsDefending Grade A Rates in Housing Disrepair Claims: When Are Senior Solicitor Rates Recoverable?
Paying parties routinely argue that housing disrepair claims should have been run at Grade C or D. That is too simplistic — but so is the answer that a Grade A solicitor is entitled to Grade A rates. This guide covers delegation, proportionality beyond damages, above-guideline rates and how to answer a rate challenge in Replies.
20 August 2026 · 12 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesNew Lottery Company v Gambling Commission [2026]: Indemnity Costs and Why Proportionality Drops Out
On the standard basis proportionality is the most common line of attack on a bill. On the indemnity basis it is unavailable — which is why, where conduct supports it, the basis of assessment is worth more than any individual argument about an item.
19 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesTimokhin v Timokhina [2026] EWHC 1194: Can a 91% Part 36 Offer Still Be a Genuine Attempt to Settle?
There is no minimum discount that makes a Part 36 offer genuine. The question is whether the offer was sober and realistic rather than tokenistic and illusory — and the party resisting faces a formidable obstacle.
19 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesWinros v Global Energy [2026]: Can a Solicitor Recover Fees After Accepting a Repudiatory Breach?
Where the very circumstances are addressed in the contract, it is not possible to imply a different basis for the relationship. A solicitor-client case that completes the entitlement picture alongside HD and Kapoor.
19 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Clinical Negligence CostsHD v North Devon Healthcare Trust [2026]: When an Unenforceable Retainer Wipes Out Recoverable Costs
The first item on a bill of costs is not an attendance or a letter. It is the receiving party’s liability to pay the costs being claimed — and when that failed here, six assessments were struck out and £92,000 already paid on account had to be repaid.
19 August 2026 · 7 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesCubic v TfL [2026] EWHC 211: How Much Should Be Paid on Account of Costs?
Cubic won the legal proposition — there is no fixed percentage — and lost the application, because on the evidence 60% was comfortably safe. The percentage is an output, not an input.
19 August 2026 · 6 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesAttersley v UK Insurance [2026] EWCA Civ 217: Late Part 36 Acceptance Does Not Rewrite the Costs Regime
Six dates decide a Part 36 costs analysis and most files record two. Attersley shows why the expiry of the relevant period matters more than the date of acceptance — and expressly leaves two timing combinations open.
19 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesAlphabet v AXA [2026] EWHC 674: Is It an Abuse to Issue Proceedings to Recover Pre-Action Costs?
The claimant won both arguments — no abuse, and reasonableness rather than necessity — and was awarded £599 against a claim of £1,006.80. Entitlement, regime and quantum are three separate questions.
19 August 2026 · 6 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesWard v Rai [2026] EWCA Civ 816: When Can Defective Points of Dispute Survive?
Ward does not weaken the requirement to draft proper Points of Dispute. It changes the consequence of getting them wrong from something close to automatic into a discretionary case-management question — which is a harder result for receiving parties, not an easier one.
19 August 2026 · 6 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesCosts Case Law: The Decisions That Matter, and What They Actually Decide
Every costs decision covered here, grouped by what it decides rather than by date — including one that reversed completely on appeal, which is why a digest assembled from headnotes is worth less than it looks.
19 August 2026 · 6 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesKapoor v Johal: When a Bill of Costs Is Assessed at Nil
The outcome is rare. The failure that produced it was ordinary: a bill that was never reconciled against what the client had actually been charged.
19 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Legal CostsThe Costs Recovery Checklist for Claimant Firms, Stage by Stage
The spine of a claimant costs recovery, stage by stage, with the detailed checks linked at each point rather than repeated. More recovery is lost to the deadlines than to any argument about an item in the bill.
19 August 2026 · 5 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesMazur and the Conduct of Litigation: Where the Law Stands After the Court of Appeal
For six months the answer depended on where a task fell in a contested analysis. It now depends on something a firm controls directly: whether the authorised individual retained responsibility.
19 August 2026 · 6 min readRead →Legal CostsCosts Draftsman or Costs Lawyer: Which Do You Actually Need?
The drafting work is often identical. What differs is regulation, reserved rights and who you complain to. A straight account of the distinction, including which one DMD Costs is.
19 August 2026 · 6 min readRead →Clinical Negligence CostsPoints of Dispute in Clinical Negligence Costs: The Timetable, the Budget and the Usual Challenges
More recovery is lost to the periods in CPR 47 than to any single argument about an item in the bill. What the timetable requires, what the budget already settles, and what paying parties challenge in a clinical negligence bill.
19 August 2026 · 9 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesPart 36 Late Acceptance: When Does the CPR 36.17 Uplift Actually Apply?
Late acceptance is not the same as beating a Part 36 offer at judgment. We explain CPR 36.13, CPR 36.17, indemnity costs, interest and the additional amount claimant firms should actually claim.
19 August 2026 · 10 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesJXX and Santiago: Medical Agency Fees Head to the Court of Appeal in March 2027
JXX v Archibald and MIB v Santiago are listed in the Court of Appeal two days apart in March 2027. Both turn on the same problem: when an agency sits between the solicitor and the person doing the work, how much of its charge is recoverable, and how much must be disclosed to justify it?
19 August 2026 · 9 min readRead →Costs BudgetingFuschillo v Johnson & Johnson (No 2) [2026]: Why the High Court Ordered Costs Budgeting in £10m+ Litigation
Mrs Justice Hill ordered costs budgeting in the Johnson & Johnson talc group litigation, holding that six-monthly costs updates would give the court transparency but not control. A claim worth more than £10 million sits outside the automatic regime — it is not exempt from budgeting.
19 August 2026 · 11 min readRead →Housing Disrepair Costs£1,000 Housing Disrepair Settlement Does Not Automatically Mean Small Claims Costs: Smith v Wigan Borough Council
Smith v Wigan Borough Council is a useful authority against the familiar paying-party argument that a pre-issue Housing Disrepair settlement at £1,000 must mean Small Claims Track costs only. The settlement figure is one measure of value, not the answer — the court has to ask what track the claim would actually have been allocated to had proceedings been issued.
18 August 2026 · 13 min readRead →Clinical Negligence CostsClinical Negligence Costs Budgets: Precedent H, the CCMC and the Rules That Decide Recovery
Costs management does not apply to every clinical negligence claim - most birth injury and paediatric claims sit outside it entirely, and the exception survives the claimant turning 18. This guide sets out the rules that decide recovery, from CPR 3.12 through to CPR 3.18.
18 August 2026 · 9 min readRead →Clinical Negligence CostsClinical Negligence Bills of Costs: Precedent S, the Electronic Bill and the Transition Date
A claim can sit outside costs budgeting entirely and still require an electronic bill. The exclusions in CPR 3.12 and PD 47 are different lists, and in clinical negligence that difference decides how the bill is drawn.
18 August 2026 · 8 min readRead →MoD NIHL CostsAbbott v Ministry of Defence: the Costs Judgment, 60% of Common Costs and a £2.5m Payment on Account
Garnham J ordered the MoD to pay 60% of the claimants’ common costs of the generic issues trial, with an interim payment of £2,515,194.95. The more useful point for costs practitioners is why the payment on account came in at 50% rather than the 65% sought — and that reason is about costs documentation, not the merits.
17 August 2026 · 8 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsAwaab’s Law Phase 2 Begins on 30 November 2026: What Claimant Housing Solicitors Need to Know
Awaab’s Law Phase 2 begins on 30 November 2026, extending the fixed response-time regime to a much wider group of serious hazards. We consider the implications for claimant solicitors, evidence gathering, pleadings and legal costs.
5 August 2026 · 12 min readRead →Legal Costs UpdatesCourt Fee Increases From 13 July 2026: Updated Costs and Detailed Assessment Fees
Updated civil court fees took effect on 13 July 2026 under a revised HMCTS EX50 schedule. We set out the current fees for Part 8 costs-only claims, applications, Default Costs Certificates, detailed assessment and Fixed Costs Determinations.
14 July 2026 · 8 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsHousing Disrepair Claims With Rent Arrears: Can a Tenant Still Claim?
A tenant’s rent arrears do not automatically prevent a Housing Disrepair claim. We examine counterclaims, set-off, possession proceedings, the treatment of damages and the costs position for claimant firms.
14 July 2026 · 9 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsDuffy v Birmingham City Council: Can a Defective Housing Disrepair Bill Still Commence Detailed Assessment?
The Court of Appeal has confirmed that an omitted certification box does not automatically invalidate a signed bill of costs. We examine what Duffy v Birmingham City Council means for Housing Disrepair costs, Points of Dispute and Default Costs Certificates.
19 June 2026 · 8 min readRead →MoD NIHL CostsAbbott v Ministry of Defence: The Costs Consequences for Military NIHL Claims
Abbott v Ministry of Defence provides major new guidance on the diagnosis and valuation of military hearing loss claims. We examine what the judgment means for expert evidence, audiology work, hearing aids and the preparation of MoD NIHL bills.
19 June 2026 · 10 min readRead →Clinical Negligence CostsJXX v Archibald: Is the Recoverable MRO Mark-Up Now Capped at 25%?
JXX v Archibald has changed the approach to Medical Reporting Organisation fees. The Senior Costs Judge treated MRO charges as disbursements and adopted a maximum recoverable mark-up of 25% of the expert invoice. We examine what that means for claimant firms.
19 June 2026 · 10 min readRead →Costs-Only ProceedingsCPR 46.14 Costs-Only Proceedings: When Should Claimant Solicitors Issue Part 8?
Costs agreed in principle but not paid? This guide explains when claimant solicitors should consider CPR 46.14 costs-only proceedings and Part 8 after settlement.
11 June 2026 · 9 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsPoints of Dispute in Housing Disrepair Costs: The 12 Most Common Reductions
Received Points of Dispute on a housing disrepair bill? This guide explains the 12 most common reductions raised by paying parties and how claimant firms should approach Replies and negotiation.
11 June 2026 · 10 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsBreach of Settlement in Housing Disrepair Claims: Can Claimant Firms Recover Further Costs?
Has a landlord breached a housing disrepair settlement or failed to complete agreed works? This guide explains when claimant firms may be able to recover further costs, why Tomlin Order wording matters and how to protect the HDR costs position.
11 June 2026 · 9 min readRead →Legal CostsGuideline Hourly Rates 2026: What Claimant Firms Need to Know
The 2026 Guideline Hourly Rates are now in force. This guide explains the new rates and how claimant firms should approach hourly rates, fee earner grades, proportionality and paying party challenges.
10 June 2026 · 9 min readRead →MoD NIHL CostsMoD NIHL Costs After Matrix Settlement: Why the Damages Matrix Does Not Cap Your Costs
Does the MoD NIHL damages matrix cap recoverable legal costs? This guide explains the difference between damages and costs, why military hearing loss claims should not be under-settled on costs, and when N252 or CPR 46.14 may be needed.
10 June 2026 · 8 min readRead →Housing Disrepair CostsHousing Disrepair Costs in 2026: Are HDR Claims Still Standard Basis?
Are housing disrepair costs still recoverable on the standard basis in 2026? This guide explains the current HDR costs position for claimant solicitors, including fixed recoverable costs, N252, Precedent S and CPR 46.14 costs-only proceedings.
10 June 2026 · 8 min readRead →