Hill v Bailey [2003] EWHC 2835 (Ch) (25 November 2003)

Hill v Bailey [2003] EWHC 2835 (Ch) (25 November 2003)

Section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Community Legal Service (Costs) Regulations 2000 do not prevent the Defendant from seeking detailed assessment of costs for the purpose of set-off against sums owed to the Claimant, even though the Claimant is an assisted person. Delay in seeking assessment does not bar the application, and the Defendant is entitled to assessment for set-off purposes.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 2835 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: John Robin Bertram Hill; Defendant: Thomas Anstey Bailey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Costs Office Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Legal Aid, Costs Assessment, Set Off of Costs, Limitation Periods
Civil Procedure Costs Legal Aid Costs Assessment Set Off of Costs Limitation Periods

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

Parties

John Robin Bertram Hill

Claimant

Thomas Anstey Bailey

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Costs Office Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Community Legal Service (Costs) Regulations 2000 prevent set-off of costs against an assisted person?
  2. 2 Is the Defendant time-barred from seeking detailed assessment of costs?
  3. 3 Does delay in seeking assessment disentitle the Defendant to assessment?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 11 of the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Community Legal Service (Costs) Regulations 2000 do not prevent the Defendant from seeking detailed assessment of costs for the purpose of set-off against sums owed to the Claimant, even though the Claimant is an assisted person. Delay in seeking assessment does not bar the application, and the Defendant is entitled to assessment for set-off purposes.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Orders of Master Wright dated 11 March 2003 and 1 May 2003 set aside
  • Matter remitted to Master Wright for detailed assessment