A B & Ors v Department of Trade & Industry s/a British Coal Corporation [2005] EWCA Civ 1737 (21 December 2005)

A B & Ors v Department of Trade & Industry s/a British Coal Corporation [2005] EWCA Civ 1737 (21 December 2005)

The Court held that the CHA schedule 17 figures are highly material but not determinative; costs must be assessed fairly, balancing the negotiated rates, the actual work required in FTO cases, and the need for solicitors to advise claimants. The judge's instinctive approach was justified given the lack of precise evidence, but evidence-based assessment is preferable where possible.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1737
Parties
Claimants/respondents: A B and Others; Defendant/appellant: Department of Trade & Industry s/a British Coal Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Costs Assessment Orders
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; costs orders affirmed.
Legal Topics
Group Litigation, Fixed Costs, Solicitor Remuneration, Coal Industry Respiratory Disease Claims
Civil Procedure Costs Law Personal Injury Group Litigation Fixed Costs Solicitor Remuneration Coal Industry Respiratory Disease Claims

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

Parties

A B and Others

Claimants/respondents

Department of Trade & Industry s/a British Coal Corporation

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Costs Assessment Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate fixed fee for solicitors in fast-track offer (FTO) cases under the British Coal Corporation Respiratory Disease Litigation scheme?
  2. 2 Should the Claims Handling Agreement (CHA) schedule 17 figures be determinative or merely relevant in assessing costs?
  3. 3 Is a bottom-up evidence-based approach preferable to an instinctive or qualitative assessment?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the CHA schedule 17 figures are highly material but not determinative; costs must be assessed fairly, balancing the negotiated rates, the actual work required in FTO cases, and the need for solicitors to advise claimants. The judge's instinctive approach was justified given the lack of precise evidence, but evidence-based assessment is preferable where possible.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; costs orders affirmed.

Orders

  • Costs for live FTO claims fixed at £1,478 plus VAT and disbursements per claim.
  • Costs for deceased FTO claims fixed at £1,675 plus VAT and disbursements per claim.