Naylor v Monahan & Anor [2011] EWHC 1412 (QB) (26 May 2011)
The judge was entitled to adopt a broad-brush approach in the summary assessment of costs, having considered the individual items and the proportionality of the total costs, and was not required to provide a detailed explanation for each reduction.
- Citation
- [2011] EWHC 1412 (QB)
- Parties
- Claimant/appellant: Leslie Stuart Naylor; 1st Defendant/respondent: David Monahan; 2nd Defendant/respondent: Churchill Insurance Co Ltd T/A Prudential
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 May 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Summary Assessment of Costs
- Outcome
- Application for permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Summary Assessment of Costs, Proportionality of Costs, Judicial Discretion in Costs Assessment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Leslie Stuart Naylor
Claimant/appellant
David Monahan
1st Defendant/respondent
Churchill Insurance Co Ltd T/A Prudential
2nd Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Summary Assessment of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judge erred in the summary assessment of costs by failing to consider each item in the bill and by failing to provide adequate reasons for reducing the claimed hours
Ratio Decidendi
The judge was entitled to adopt a broad-brush approach in the summary assessment of costs, having considered the individual items and the proportionality of the total costs, and was not required to provide a detailed explanation for each reduction.
Court Disposition
Application for permission to appeal refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment