Duffy v Birmingham City Council [2026] EWCA Civ 146 (25 February 2026)

Duffy v Birmingham City Council [2026] EWCA Civ 146 (25 February 2026)

Failure to expressly certify compliance with the indemnity principle in a bill of costs is a procedural defect but does not render the bill invalid or a nullity; the solicitor's signature suffices as implicit certification. The defect does not entitle the paying party to set aside a default costs certificate as of right under CPR 47.12(1).

Citation
[2026] EWCA Civ 146
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Daniella Duffy; Defendant/appellant: Birmingham City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal to Court of Appeal From County Court Decision on Costs Assessment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Default Costs Certificate, Detailed Assessment of Costs, Indemnity Principle, Procedural Defects, CPR 47.6, CPR 47.12, Practice Direction 47
Civil Procedure Costs Default Costs Certificate Detailed Assessment of Costs Indemnity Principle Procedural Defects CPR 47.6 CPR 47.12 +1 more

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniella Duffy

Claimant/respondent

Birmingham City Council

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal to Court of Appeal From County Court Decision on Costs Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to expressly certify compliance with the indemnity principle in a bill of costs renders the bill invalid and ineffective to commence detailed assessment under CPR 47.6
  2. 2 Whether such a defect entitles the paying party to set aside a default costs certificate as of right under CPR 47.12(1)

Ratio Decidendi

Failure to expressly certify compliance with the indemnity principle in a bill of costs is a procedural defect but does not render the bill invalid or a nullity; the solicitor's signature suffices as implicit certification. The defect does not entitle the paying party to set aside a default costs certificate as of right under CPR 47.12(1).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission granted for the Council to raise the new legal issue on appeal
  • Appeal dismissed; default costs certificate stands