Griffiths & Ors v British Coal Corporation [2007] EWHC 672 (QB) (03 April 2007)

Griffiths & Ors v British Coal Corporation [2007] EWHC 672 (QB) (03 April 2007)

The appropriate level of solicitors' costs for OROS claims in the BCRDL should be determined by taking the CHA tariff as the starting point, but with adjustments to reflect the actual work required under the OROS process, as evidenced by the Senior Costs Judge's analysis. The court rejected a purely 'bottom up'...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 672
Parties
Claimant: Griffiths & Others; Defendant: British Coal Corporation; Interested Party: Union of Democratic Mineworkers (UDM)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Costs Determination in Group Litigation / Post Settlement Costs Assessment Following Court of Appeal Remittal
Outcome
Costs determined; new fixed costs set for OROS claims.
Legal Topics
Group Litigation, Solicitors' Costs, Fixed Costs Schemes, Assessment of Costs, Contractual Interpretation
Civil Procedure Costs Law Group Litigation Solicitors' Costs Fixed Costs Schemes Assessment of Costs Contractual Interpretation

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Griffiths & Others

Claimant

British Coal Corporation

Defendant

Union of Democratic Mineworkers (UDM)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Costs Determination in Group Litigation / Post Settlement Costs Assessment Following Court of Appeal Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate level of solicitors' costs for claims settled under the fast track or optional risk offer schemes (OROS) in the British Coal Corporation Respiratory Disease Litigation (BCRDL)?
  2. 2 Should the costs be determined by reference to the original Claims Handling Agreement (CHA) tariff or by a detailed assessment based on actual work done?

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate level of solicitors' costs for OROS claims in the BCRDL should be determined by taking the CHA tariff as the starting point, but with adjustments to reflect the actual work required under the OROS process, as evidenced by the Senior Costs Judge's analysis. The court rejected a purely 'bottom up' detailed assessment but also declined to apply the CHA tariff without modification, instead setting costs at a level reflecting reasonable and proportionate work done in OROS claims.

Court Disposition

Costs determined; new fixed costs set for OROS claims.

Orders

  • Costs for LOROS claims set at £790 per claim (2005/6 rates).
  • Costs for DOROS claims set at £836 per claim (2005/6 rates).