Price v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC 3395 (QB) (16 November 2018)

Price v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC 3395 (QB) (16 November 2018)

The claimant's costs were assessed by reference to reasonableness and proportionality, applying the CPR and relevant guideline rates, with reductions made for excessive hourly rates, time spent, and counsel's fees. The absence of prior costs budgeting was regrettable and led to closer scrutiny, but the claimant was entitled to significant costs due to the importance and complexity of the applications. The court allowed reduced but substantial costs, exclusive of VAT and the current hearing, and emphasized the need for advance costs management in future similar cases.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 3395 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Sean Price; Defendant: MGN Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Costs Assessment Following Preliminary Issue Trial and Summary Judgment/strike Out Applications
Outcome
Claimant awarded costs, subject to summary assessment and reductions as specified.
Legal Topics
Libel, Costs Assessment, Preliminary Issue Trial, Case Management, Costs Budgeting
Media Law Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Costs Assessment Preliminary Issue Trial Case Management Costs Budgeting

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

Parties

Sean Price

Claimant

MGN Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Costs Assessment Following Preliminary Issue Trial and Summary Judgment/strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's claimed costs for the preliminary issue trial and related applications are reasonable and proportionate
  2. 2 Whether the absence of prior costs budgeting affects the assessment of costs
  3. 3 What directions should be given for future case management in media cases involving preliminary issues

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's costs were assessed by reference to reasonableness and proportionality, applying the CPR and relevant guideline rates, with reductions made for excessive hourly rates, time spent, and counsel's fees. The absence of prior costs budgeting was regrettable and led to closer scrutiny, but the claimant was entitled to significant costs due to the importance and complexity of the applications. The court allowed reduced but substantial costs, exclusive of VAT and the current hearing, and emphasized the need for advance costs management in future similar cases.

Court Disposition

Claimant awarded costs, subject to summary assessment and reductions as specified.

Orders

  • Claimant awarded costs of the applications heard on 30 October 2018, assessed summarily on the standard basis, with reductions for hourly rates, time spent, and counsel's fees as detailed in the judgment.
  • Claimant to recover costs if successful at trial or settlement; solicitors entitled to success fee if claim succeeds.