Sun11192017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

COSTS: When detailed assessment goes wrong

26 May 2017  

Paul Jones outlines the consequences of improper and unreasonable conduct when serving a bill of costs

The signing of a certificate of accuracy in a bill of costs as required by CPR 47 PD 5.21 is normally a fairly uncontroversial subject. It confirms that the bill is accurate and complies with the indemnity principle and creates a rebuttable presumption to this effect which a paying party will normally struggle to challenge. However, in some cases, the manner in which the receiving party presents their bill of costs and conducts the detailed assessment proceedings can give the paying party such an open goal in challenging the bill’s certification that the final outcome can be near inevitable. The recently released case of Jago v Whitbread Group (2016) is a textbook example of how not to certify a bill of costs or conduct detailed assessment proceedings.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Bailey v IBC Vehicles [1998] EWCA Civ 566

    Jago v Whitbread Group (2016) unreported, SCCO, Master Whalan, 5 October

    Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] EWCA Civ 40

Last modified on 31 May 2017