Read all about Budgets!
This month, we revisited the standout legal costs cases that shaped May 2025. Susie Power looked at the risks of exaggerated budgets in Zavorotnii v Malinowski, while Rebekkah Haughton highlighted the dangers of inaccurate or copied budgets in Hunt v Oceania. Finally, Steve Burn explored the importance of costs management orders and CPR 3.15A following the case of BDW Trading v Ardmore.
Past success is no guarantee of future success in budgeting
Susie Power takes a look at one potential consequence of falling foul with an exaggerated budget. For all personal injury litigators, costs lawyers and legal teams who prepare budgets as part of their high-value case management, take note of the warning in Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] – ‘costs in the case’ at the end of a hearing, just because it is the ‘norm’ does not mean it’s a guarantee. Producing an accurate budget is paramount to avoid risking adverse costs consequences at a budget hearing.
Do not reheat the Nachos! – How filing an inaccurate, copied and dishonest Costs Budget with the Court could damage your reputation.
Rebekkah Haughton, looks at the recent judgment of Hunt v Oceania Capital Reserves Ltd & Ors highlights the importance of filing an accurate Costs Budget and the consequences of submitting an incoherent or copied Costs Budget, even if the filing is late. If you are a litigator in Costs Budgeting, this case is essential reading for future Cost Budget filings.
The importance of budgeting, costs management and compliance with the Court.
Steve Burn looks at the case of BDW Trading v Ardmore. This article is important for costs professionals dealing with costs management orders and the amendment of costs budgets under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), particularly CPR 3.15A.
Stay tuned for the latest updates throughout April 2025! Cost News
05.06.2025