Henry v British Broadcasting Corporation [2005] EWHC 2503 (QB) (11 November 2005)

Henry v British Broadcasting Corporation [2005] EWHC 2503 (QB) (11 November 2005)

A costs capping order was refused because the application was made too late for the capped party to plan expenditure, and the judge was not equipped to determine appropriate figures without a Costs Judge. The purpose of costs capping is prospective planning, not retrospective penalty, and imposing a cap at this...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 2503
Parties
Claimant: Marion Henry; Defendant: British Broadcasting Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Libel Action (defamation) / Pre Trial Review; Application for Costs Capping Order
Outcome
Application for costs capping order refused
Legal Topics
Costs Capping, Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa), After the Event (ate) Insurance, Freedom of Expression, Justification Defence, Qualified Privilege
Civil Procedure Media Law Defamation Costs Capping Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa) After the Event (ate) Insurance Freedom of Expression Justification Defence +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marion Henry

Claimant

British Broadcasting Corporation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action (defamation) / Pre Trial Review; Application for Costs Capping Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a costs capping order should be imposed on the Claimant's costs in a libel action funded by CFA and ATE insurance
  2. 2 Whether the late application for a costs cap should be granted given the stage of proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

A costs capping order was refused because the application was made too late for the capped party to plan expenditure, and the judge was not equipped to determine appropriate figures without a Costs Judge. The purpose of costs capping is prospective planning, not retrospective penalty, and imposing a cap at this stage would be unfair.

Court Disposition

Application for costs capping order refused