England and Wales Case Law

Russian Operator Policy Claims, Re

The Deep Sky Claimants failed to provide sufficient evidence that security for costs would stifle their claims, particularly given evidence that parent and group companies have funded litigation costs to date. The court is entitled to expect claimants to seek funding from within their corporate structure. The amounts sought for security are proportionate and justified. Security for costs is therefore ordered in the amounts sought by the War Risk Defendants.

Source excerpt

• Security for costs
• Corporate structure and funding
• Stifling of claims
• Costs management

Read case analysis

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

Bromcom Computers PLC v Arbor Education Partners Limited & Ors

The court approved costs budgets for each phase after reductions, based on holistic assessment of reasonableness and proportionality, referencing CPR 44.3 and 44.4, and declined to budget for speculative future work in the statements of case phase.

Source excerpt

• Costs management
• Proportionality
• Public procurement
• Fraud allegations

Read case analysis

Bromcom Computers Plc v Arbor Education Partners Ltd & Ors

Bromcom Computers Plc v Arbor Education Partners Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 379 (KB) (18 February 2026)

Master Dagnall made a costs management order and adjusted the parties’ Precedent H budgets across multiple phases, applying CPR proportionality and reasonableness principles.

• Costs management
• Costs budgeting
• Proportionality of costs
• Cpr 3.15
• Cpr 44.3
• Cpr 44.4

Read case analysis

Rudan Business Holding SA v Tridan Trusted Advisors AG & Ors (Re Leo Services Holding Ltd)

Rudan Business Holding SA v Tridan Trusted Advisors AG & Ors (Re Leo Services Holding Ltd) [2025] EWHC 3565 (Ch) (17 February 2026)

Costs budget variation application in a s.994 unfair prejudice petition: variations were allowed only where significant developments justified them and the parties acted promptly.

• Costs management
• Budget variation
• Unfair prejudice
• Disclosure
• Case management
• Costs-management

Read case analysis

Rudan Business Holding SA v Tridan Trusted Advisors AG & Ors

The High Court considered applications to vary costs budgets in a shareholder unfair prejudice petition, allowing increases only for later CCMC, trial preparation and trial.

• Costs management
• Unfair prejudice
• Disclosure
• Case management
• Costs-management
• Costs-budgets

Read case analysis

David Parsons v Convatec Limited

The court approved costs budgets for both parties, applying principles of reasonableness and proportionality, making targeted reductions to Defendant's budget where luxury or excessive rates were identified, and adjusting Claimant's disclosure budget to reflect the less exacting nature of his disclosure exercise.

Source excerpt

• Patents
• Costs management
• Costs budgeting
• Section 40 patents act 1977

Read case analysis

Various Claimants v Mercedes-Benz Group AG & Ors (PAN NOX EMISSIONS LITIGATION)

Various Claimants v Mercedes-Benz Group AG & Ors (PAN NOX EMISSIONS LITIGATION) [2026] EWHC 267 (KB) (10 February 2026)

The High Court varied the usual costs order after a second costs management hearing, allowing a 20% deduction from the claimants’ recoverable budget-preparation costs.

• Costs management
• Group litigation orders
• Costs budgeting
• Proportionality
• Costs-management
• Costs-budgeting

Read case analysis

Dhan Kumar Limbu & Ors v Dyson Technology Limited & Ors

The High Court ordered lead claimants and a split liability trial in this group action, refused a preliminary issues trial on assumed facts, and allowed limited early disclosure.

• Negligence
• Intentional torts (false imprisonment, intimidation, assault, battery)
• Unjust enrichment
• Case management
• Disclosure
• Aggravated damages

Read case analysis

Baroness Lawrence & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd (Re Costs)

Baroness Lawrence & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd (Re Costs) [2025] EWHC 3207 (KB) (09 December 2025)

The High Court held the claimants jointly and severally liable for common costs and allowed several budget variations in this media claims litigation.

• Costs management
• Adverse costs liability
• Budget variation
• Joint and several liability
• Group litigation principles
• Costs-management

Read case analysis