Peacock v MGN Ltd

Peacock v MGN Ltd

A costs capping order is not justified because the risk of disproportionate costs can be adequately controlled by a costs judge at the stage of detailed assessment, and the circumstances do not meet the threshold of exceptionality required by the rules.

Parties
Claimant: Matthew Peacock; Defendant: MGN Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation) / Interlocutory Application for Costs Capping Order
Outcome
Application for costs capping order refused
Legal Topics
Costs Capping, Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa), Freedom of Expression, Case Management
Defamation Civil Procedure Costs Capping Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa) Freedom of Expression Case Management

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Peacock

Claimant

MGN Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation) / Interlocutory Application for Costs Capping Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a costs capping order should be made in a libel action funded by a CFA
  2. 2 Whether the risk of disproportionate costs can be controlled by case management or detailed assessment

Ratio Decidendi

A costs capping order is not justified because the risk of disproportionate costs can be adequately controlled by a costs judge at the stage of detailed assessment, and the circumstances do not meet the threshold of exceptionality required by the rules.

Court Disposition

Application for costs capping order refused