Hollins v Russell

Hollins v Russell

In complex cases, costs should not be disallowed for failed arguments unless unreasonably taken; claimants are entitled to costs throughout, with sums on account and detailed assessment as appropriate.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Bradley Hollins; Defendant/respondent: Rev S H Russell; Appellant/claimant: Mark Edward Tichband; Respondent/defendant: Mrs B Hurdman; Respondent/claimant: Alison Dunn; Defendant/appellant: Helen Ward; Claimant/respondent: Dora May Pratt; Defendant/appellant: Daniel David Michael Bull; Claimant/respondent: John Joseph Worth; Defendant/appellant: James Joseph McKenna; Claimant/respondent: Gerald Sharratt; Defendant/appellant: London Central Bus Company Limited; Appellants/defendants: Appellants/Defendants (A2/2002/2647); Respondents/claimants: Respondents/Claimants (A2/2002/2647)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (costs) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Costs
Outcome
Appeals on costs allowed or varied as specified; costs orders made for each case as per judgment.
Legal Topics
Costs, Detailed Assessment, Indemnity Costs, Issue Based Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Costs Detailed Assessment Indemnity Costs Issue Based Costs Orders

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bradley Hollins

Claimant/appellant

Rev S H Russell

Defendant/respondent

Mark Edward Tichband

Appellant/claimant

Mrs B Hurdman

Respondent/defendant

Alison Dunn

Respondent/claimant

Helen Ward

Defendant/appellant

Dora May Pratt

Claimant/respondent

Daniel David Michael Bull

Defendant/appellant

John Joseph Worth

Claimant/respondent

James Joseph McKenna

Defendant/appellant

Gerald Sharratt

Claimant/respondent

London Central Bus Company Limited

Defendant/appellant

Appellants/Defendants (A2/2002/2647)

Appellants/defendants

Respondents/Claimants (A2/2002/2647)

Respondents/claimants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (costs) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be disallowed for failed arguments unless unreasonably taken
  2. 2 Whether claimants are entitled to costs throughout
  3. 3 Appropriate sum on account of costs

Ratio Decidendi

In complex cases, costs should not be disallowed for failed arguments unless unreasonably taken; claimants are entitled to costs throughout, with sums on account and detailed assessment as appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeals on costs allowed or varied as specified; costs orders made for each case as per judgment.

Orders

  • Hollins v Russell: Claimant entitled to costs throughout; £7,500 on account; rest to detailed assessment.
  • Tichband v Hurdman: Claimant entitled to costs throughout and indemnity costs from last offer date; £20,000 on account; rest to detailed assessment.