AB v Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1889 (QB) (16 July 2019)

AB v Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1889 (QB) (16 July 2019)

The Regional Costs Judge was entitled to find that the additional liabilities were reasonably incurred due to the need to instruct further experts in a complex causation dispute, and that the failures to advise on the Simmons v Castle uplift and increased exposure to solicitors' costs did not render the decision unreasonable given the specific facts and evidence.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 1889
Parties
Claimant and Respondent: AB (a protected party by his mother and litigation friend YZ); Defendant and Appellant: Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Regional Costs Judge's Order on Recoverability of Additional Liabilities
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Recoverability of Additional Liabilities, Conditional Fee Agreements, Legal Aid, Expert Evidence Funding, Success Fees, ATE Insurance Premiums
Civil Procedure Costs Medical Negligence Recoverability of Additional Liabilities Conditional Fee Agreements Legal Aid Expert Evidence Funding Success Fees +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB (a protected party by his mother and litigation friend YZ)

Claimant and Respondent

Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Defendant and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Regional Costs Judge's Order on Recoverability of Additional Liabilities

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the additional liabilities (success fee and insurance premium) were reasonably incurred and recoverable
  2. 2 Whether the failure to advise on the Simmons v Castle uplift rendered the change of funding unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether the failure to advise on increased exposure to unrecovered solicitors' costs rendered the change unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Regional Costs Judge was entitled to find that the additional liabilities were reasonably incurred due to the need to instruct further experts in a complex causation dispute, and that the failures to advise on the Simmons v Castle uplift and increased exposure to solicitors' costs did not render the decision unreasonable given the specific facts and evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • AB awarded costs of the appeal, summarily assessed at £10,000 for solicitors' costs and £9,280 for other costs plus VAT where applicable
  • Issue of the success fee quantum referred to the Regional Costs Judge