Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The UK Supreme Court held that CJRS furlough payments must be deducted under business interruption savings clauses because they reduced expenses and were caused by the insured peril.
The Court of Appeal held that failure to expressly certify compliance with the indemnity principle in a bill of costs is a procedural defect, not a nullity.
Duffy v Birmingham City Council [2026] EWCA Civ 146 (25 February 2026)
The Court of Appeal held that omission of an express indemnity-principle certificate in a bill of costs is a procedural defect, not a nullity.
The statutory framework does not provide for the disapplication of the indemnity principle in criminal legal aid, where it funds civil contempt proceedings. Costs recoverable by a legally aided party are limited to legal aid rates prescribed by the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013. The LAA's assessment is not binding, and retrospective private retainers cannot increase recoverable costs. The application for a Costs Capping Order fails as the criteria under CPR r 3.19(5) are not met.
Source excerpt
The applicant was properly served and had multiple opportunities to make representations regarding costs; failure to monitor the registered address and respond was the applicant's own fault. There was no evidence to rebut the presumption that the respondent was liable for costs, and no breach of the indemnity principle occurred. Relief from sanctions was not justified due to serious and unexplained delay.
Source excerpt
The court determined that the hourly rates historically awarded (£89 for investigative work and £32 for travel) were outdated and did not reflect inflation or the increased costs of business since 2015. Applying a broad-brush inflation adjustment of 20%, the court set the appropriate hourly rate for investigative and travel work at £107 per hour and for supervisory work at £142 per hour. The court rejected the Appellant's claim for a profit element, holding that section 17 is purely compensatory and does not permit profit recovery. The determination is limited to the two cases under appeal an…
Source excerpt
TM Eye, R (On the Application Of) v Hall [2026] EWHC 70 (SCCO) (16 January 2026)
The court partly allowed TM Eye Ltd’s appeal on private prosecution costs, increasing certain hourly rates and holding that section 17 is compensatory, not profit-based.
Bionome Technology Ltd v Clearwater [2025] EWHC 3518 (Ch) (18 December 2025)
The High Court refused Bionome Technology Ltd’s attempt to set aside a costs order and obtain relief from sanctions, finding proper service and no indemnity-principle problem.
Lords Solicitors LLP and the Claimant were responsible for repeated and serious breaches of the CPR and Practice Directions, including the manufacture and use of an inauthentic solicitor/client bill to mislead the court and the Third Defendant regarding the indemnity principle. This conduct was improper, unreasonable, and negligent, justifying a 50% reduction in the Claimant's assessed costs under CPR 44.11(2)(a) and an order that Lords bear the Third Defendant's additional costs incurred as a result of their conduct under CPR 44.11(2)(b) and CPR 46.8. No sanction was imposed on Ms Wills or M…
Source excerpt
Non-compliance with Regulation 13 does not render the retainer unenforceable; Claimants are entitled to costs recovery unless restricted by the Costs Sharing Order, which prevents Corporate Claimants from recovering costs on a joint liability basis.
Source excerpt
Explore more
