Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 19 (28 January 2013)

Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 19 (28 January 2013)

The Court of Appeal held that failure to comply with all requirements of Practice Direction 51D is not, by itself, determinative of whether there is good reason to depart from an approved costs budget. All circumstances must be considered, including whether the objects of the costs management scheme were frustrated. In this case, the failure did not result in inequality of arms or disproportionate costs, and the objects of the scheme were not undermined. Therefore, there was good reason to depart from the budget.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 19
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Sylvia Henry; Defendant/respondent: News Group Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Senior Courts Costs Office on a Preliminary Issue in Detailed Assessment of Costs
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Costs Budgeting, Practice Direction 51 D, Defamation Proceedings, Detailed Assessment of Costs, Departure From Approved Costs Budget
Civil Procedure Costs Costs Budgeting Practice Direction 51 D Defamation Proceedings Detailed Assessment of Costs Departure From Approved Costs Budget

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sylvia Henry

Claimant/appellant

News Group Newspapers Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Senior Courts Costs Office on a Preliminary Issue in Detailed Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was good reason to depart from the court-approved costs budget under Practice Direction 51D in defamation proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that failure to comply with all requirements of Practice Direction 51D is not, by itself, determinative of whether there is good reason to depart from an approved costs budget. All circumstances must be considered, including whether the objects of the costs management scheme were frustrated. In this case, the failure did not result in inequality of arms or disproportionate costs, and the objects of the scheme were not undermined. Therefore, there was good reason to depart from the budget.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Preliminary issue answered in the affirmative: there is good reason to depart from the approved costs budget. The matter is remitted to the costs judge to determine in what respects and to what extent the appellant should be allowed to recover costs in excess of the budget.