England and Wales Case Law

Various Claimants v Mercedes-Benz Group AG & Ors

The court found that the claimants' approach to budgeting, despite previous judicial criticism, remained overly ambitious and insufficiently adjusted, justifying a departure from the usual costs order. The court ordered a 20% deduction from any recoverable claimants' costs for costs management activities, while costs of preparing for and attending the hearing remain 'costs in the case'.

Source excerpt

• Costs management
• Costs orders
• Budgeting
• Litigation conduct

Read case analysis

P McCrory v Healthwatch Stockport Limited

On a proper analysis of all relevant correspondence and circumstances, including the claimant's recent bereavement and concern about costs, the only decision that could have been reached was that there was not an unequivocal withdrawal. Therefore, the claim did not automatically come to an end and there could be no judgment on withdrawal. The dismissal judgment was made in error of law.

Source excerpt

• Withdrawal of claims
• Dismissal judgments
• Costs orders
• Case management
• Appeals

Read case analysis

Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea v Beko Poland Manufacturing & Ors

Defendants other than Celotex are not liable for costs of the Defence and Counterclaim that was struck out, as participation in related hearings and pleadings was a matter of choice and not necessity. Celotex is to bear costs of today's hearing relating to case management and timetabling, but not costs for unsuccessful applications by other defendants.

Source excerpt

• Strikeout applications
• Costs orders
• Case management
• Pleadings

Read case analysis

Muhammad Aksahin v London Borough of Enfield

Appellant's presence as a passenger constituted participation in breach of the injunction, he had actual and constructive knowledge of the injunction, and the costs order and suspended committal were appropriate; no procedural irregularity or unfairness occurred.

Source excerpt

• Anti-social behaviour injunctions
• Car cruising
• Service of injunctions
• Contempt proceedings
• Costs orders

Read case analysis

Dentons UK And Middle East LLP v Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd

Dentons UK And Middle East LLP v Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 655 (21 May 2026)

The Court of Appeal held that the Solicitors Regulation Authority should pay 65% of Dentons’ costs on appeal, rejecting reliance on the SDT costs approach.

• Costs orders
• Appeals
• Solicitors' disciplinary proceedings
• Costs-orders
• Professional-regulation
• Solicitors-disciplinary-tribunal

Read case analysis

Dentons UK and Middle East LLP v Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd

Costs judgment in Dentons’ successful appeal. The Court of Appeal held the SRA should pay 65% of Dentons’ costs of the appeals, plus £200,000 on account.

• Costs orders
• Appeals from disciplinary tribunals
• Regulatory bodies' liability for costs
• Costs-orders
• Appeals-from-disciplinary-tribunals
• Regulatory-bodies-liability-for-costs

Read case analysis

Amar Lodhia v Twelve Management Company (Bromley-by-Bow) Limited & Ors

After discontinuance of a defamation claim, the High Court ordered the claimant to pay the defendants’ costs and made further evidence directions.

• Discontinuance
• Summary disposal
• Costs orders
• Bankruptcy and litigation capacity
• Reasonable adjustments
• Pre-action protocol compliance

Read case analysis

Lodhia v Twelve Trees Management Company (Bromley-By-Bow) Ltd & Ors

Lodhia v Twelve Trees Management Company (Bromley-By-Bow) Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 1177 (KB) (18 May 2026)

After Lodhia discontinued his defamation claim, the High Court held he must pay the defendants’ costs, including costs of prior applications and amendments.

• Discontinuance
• Costs orders
• Bankruptcy and costs liability
• Pre-action protocols
• Reasonable adjustments
• Litigant in person conduct

Read case analysis

JDK Holdings Corp v Marc Bourgade & Anor

The court granted permission to amend particulars of claim in a joint venture dispute, struck out the original particulars, and ordered the claimant to pay costs.

• Amendment of pleadings
• Strike out applications
• Joint venture agreements
• Costs orders
• Summary judgment threshold
• Fiduciary duties

Read case analysis

Cook v Skeggs

Cook v Skeggs [2026] EWHC 1132 (KB) (12 May 2026)

Appeal against a costs order allowed. The High Court held that the claimant’s failed summary judgment application and the strike-out issues meant the defendant should recover costs, subject to a 25% reduction for a late amendment.

• Costs orders
• Summary judgment
• Strike out applications
• Pleading amendments
• Possession claims
• Fraud allegations

Read case analysis