Hurst & Anor v Denton-Cox

There was no breach of the indemnity principle in the costs schedule; costs of the action are not limited to post-service costs and may include pre-action protocol costs; costs thrown away due to adjournment caused by undisclosed conflict should not be paid by claimants; pro bono costs order under s.194 Legal Services Act 2007 was not engaged as the representation was not free of charge.

Parties: Claimant/appellant: Mrs Hurst; Claimant/appellant: Mr Hurst; Defendant/respondent: Mr Denton-Cox
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 16 October 2014
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part
Legal Topics: Indemnity Principle, Costs Assessment, Conflict of Interest, Conditional Fee Agreements, Pro Bono Costs

Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Principle Costs Assessment Conflict of Interest Conditional Fee Agreements Pro Bono 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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11

Parties

Mrs Hurst

Claimant/appellant

Mr Hurst

Claimant/appellant

Mr Denton-Cox

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the costs schedule breached the indemnity principle
2 Whether costs of action are limited to post-service costs
3 Whether costs thrown away due to adjournment should be paid by claimants

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part

Orders

Reduction of assessed costs from £15,000 to £10,000
Browne Jacobson to pay Mr Hurst's wasted costs for four hours