Callery v. Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1246 (31 July 2001)

Callery v. Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1246 (31 July 2001)

Section 29 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 should be interpreted to allow recovery of ATE insurance premiums as costs, including cover for own disbursements, provided the premium is reasonable. The premium of £350 in this case was not manifestly disproportionate to the risk and was reasonable. The whole of the cover, including the small element for own costs insurance, falls within the statutory description of insurance against the risk of incurring a costs liability that cannot be passed on to the opposing party.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1246
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Stephen Callery; Defendant/appellant: Charles Gray
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal (costs) / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Referral to Costs Judge
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
After the Event Insurance, Recoverability of Insurance Premiums, Access to Justice Act 1999, Conditional Fee Arrangements, Reasonableness of Costs
Civil Procedure Costs After the Event Insurance Recoverability of Insurance Premiums Access to Justice Act 1999 Conditional Fee Arrangements Reasonableness of Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Callery

Claimant/respondent

Charles Gray

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (costs) / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Referral to Costs Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the premium for after the event (ATE) insurance is recoverable as costs under section 29 of the Access to Justice Act 1999
  2. 2 Whether the amount of £350 for the ATE premium is reasonable
  3. 3 Whether own costs insurance falls within the ambit of section 29

Ratio Decidendi

Section 29 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 should be interpreted to allow recovery of ATE insurance premiums as costs, including cover for own disbursements, provided the premium is reasonable. The premium of £350 in this case was not manifestly disproportionate to the risk and was reasonable. The whole of the cover, including the small element for own costs insurance, falls within the statutory description of insurance against the risk of incurring a costs liability that cannot be passed on to the opposing party.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The whole of Mr Callery’s ATE insurance premium, including £350 plus £7.50 IPT, is recoverable as costs.