Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

COSTS: Sharing the blame

05 June 2015  

Andrew Kelmanson provides a timely reminder of the law behind co-defendant costs orders

Alongside determining the liability of the parties to proceedings, courts are also tasked with apportioning the costs of litigating between them. Under CPR r44.2(a), the ‘general rule’ is that successful litigants are to recover their costs from unsuccessful litigants (court orders often refer to costs being ‘in the case’). This position is far less straightforward when dealing with multi-party litigation involving a number of defendants who may be facing multiple claims.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Bankamerica Finance Ltd v Nock [1988] AC 1002

    British Sky Broadcasting Group plc & ors v Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd (in Liquidation) & ors [2012] EWHC 3679 (Ch)

    Bullock v The London General Omnibus Company [1907] 1 KB 264

    Coward v Phaestos Ltd & ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1256

    Irvine v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis & ors [2005] EWCA Civ 129

    Moon v Garrett & ors [2006] EWCA Civ 1121

    Nichols v Singleton Council [2011] NSWSC 1517

    Phonographic Performance Ltd v AEI Redifusion Music Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 834

    Sanderson v Blyth Theatre Company [1903] 2 KB 533

    Sims v Carruthers & ors (2013) unreported, Manchester County Court, claim number 0MC04693; appeal number M13X083, 20 September