Woodburn v Thomas – Sen Cts Costs Office (Master McCloud) 11/08/2017

The court provided guidance on drafting bills of costs in details assessments in cases subject to the CPR Part 3 costs budgeting regime.

The bill of costs specified costs claimed on a phase-by-phase basis, each phase matching those set out in Precedent H forms. The costs lawyer set out in the CMC phase of the bill all the CMC costs which did not relate to costs budgeting. He provided a separate “non-phase” part of the bill in which all the costs relating to costs budgeting and costs management were set out. It followed that the bill’s CMC phase excluded some items of costs which related to budgeting which were required to be included in the Precedent H by the PD and the Precedent H Guidance Note.

The defendant paying party submitted that the “non-phase” costs were costs which had actually been budgeted in the CMC phase of the Precedent H and should have appeared in that part of the bill. The claimant receiving party contended that it was correct to have separated out the costs of costs budgeting in line with P v Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board (unreported) and that the costs for every item appeared only once and were not duplicated.

September 25, 2017 В· Editorial Team В· Comments Closed
Posted in: Cases