Grand v Gill

Grand v Gill

Ms Grand is entitled to a modest award of costs as a litigant in person, limited to work and disbursements reasonably and proportionately incurred in relation to the two short issues on which she succeeded in the appeal. The vast majority of her claimed costs were unjustified, exaggerated, or irrelevant to the outcome.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Tanya Grand; Respondent/defendant: Param Gill
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Application
Outcome
Costs application allowed in part; costs summarily assessed.
Legal Topics
Litigant in Person Costs, Pro Bono Costs, Costs Assessment, Appeals
Civil Procedure Costs Litigant in Person Costs Pro Bono Costs Costs Assessment Appeals

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tanya Grand

Appellant/claimant

Param Gill

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, as a litigant in person, is entitled to recover costs for her own time and disbursements in the appeal.
  2. 2 The proper quantum of costs recoverable by a litigant in person after partial success on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Grand is entitled to a modest award of costs as a litigant in person, limited to work and disbursements reasonably and proportionately incurred in relation to the two short issues on which she succeeded in the appeal. The vast majority of her claimed costs were unjustified, exaggerated, or irrelevant to the outcome.

Court Disposition

Costs application allowed in part; costs summarily assessed.

Orders

  • Mr Gill to pay Ms Grand £703.77 within 14 days of the judgment.
  • No interest awarded on the costs.