Naylor v Monahan & Anor [2011] EWHC 1412 (QB) (26 May 2011)

Naylor v Monahan & Anor [2011] EWHC 1412 (QB) (26 May 2011)

The judge acted within his discretion by considering the individual items and adopting a broad-brush approach to reduce excessive hours claimed, consistent with established principles on summary assessment of costs.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1412
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
Civil 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
Civil Procedure 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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leslie Stuart Naylor

Claimant/appellant

David Monahan

1st Defendant/respondent

Churchill Insurance Co Ltd T/A Prudential

2nd Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Summary Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in the summary assessment of costs by failing to consider each item in the bill and by failing to explain the reduction in hours allowed

Ratio Decidendi

The judge acted within his discretion by considering the individual items and adopting a broad-brush approach to reduce excessive hours claimed, consistent with established principles on summary assessment of costs.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused